The U.S. blockade of Cuba, the longest in history anywhere, has been maintained and tightened to limit the Cuban health system’s access to essential inputs to confront the deadly SARS CoV-2. Nonetheless, medical education on the island has overcome the barriers that have been erected by successive U.S. administrations, and which Trump has set out to reinforce.

In New York, the epicenter of the disease in the country, Dr. Melissa Barber today puts into practice the lessons she learned in Cuba while studying at the Latin American School of Medicine (ELAM). In the South Bronx, she leads a team that organizes and makes available to the community supplies and resources to confront the disease.

The number of positive cases is skyrocketing every day, while hospitals are overcrowded. Ensuring patient care is a real challenge, she told The Indypendent.

Never forgetting what she learned in Cuba, Dr. Barber stated, “Cuba, like few countries in the world, understands that a person’s medical care does not begin with the ambulance ride, but in the neighborhood.” She treats each neighbor as she did during his years as a student in Cuba and has identified the most vulnerable in the neighborhood, one of the poorest in New York. “That includes the elderly, people who have infants and small children, homebound people, people with multiple morbidities and are really susceptible to a virus like this one,” she said.

“The desire to save lives, as a humanist above all else, are values that I brought with me from Cuba, from my training as a doctor in a country that knows solidarity,” she continued.

The U.S. government, in its eagerness to demonize Cuba, has managed to get nations like Brazil and Bolivia to close their doors to Cuban medicine.

“On such sad days, I am filled with optimism knowing that Cuba has sent medical brigades to Italy, Surinam, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Jamaica, Grenada and others. Few countries help as much, and know as much about medical assistance in disaster situations as Cuba,” she said.

Today Melissa Barber saves lives in New York, as she did in Cuba. She helps and supports other young doctors, just as she was helped by Cuban health professionals more than a decade ago.

Solidarity and love for one’s neighbors – strong feelings that unite Havana and the Bronx, challenging the blockade.

(Source: Granma)

A total of 191 countries voted in favor of the resolution, with none voting against, and only two abstentions, for the first time ever – the United States and Israel.

The position of the United States expressed this morning is a positive sign, stated Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez at the UN headquarters, but the truth is that the blockade persists and impacts Cuba’s current reality.

The result of the vote – 191 in favor and two abstentions – is a triumph of the heroic resistance of the Cuban people.

(Granma)

Speaking for the Caribbean Community (Caricom) was the representative from Jamaica who stated that the blockade limits the ability of the proud, independent Cuban people from conducting basic financial transactions internationally, emphasizing that the policy’s goal of forcing change in Cuba has only produced suffering for the population.

The representative said that the anachronistic blockade violates the United Nations Charter and repeated General Assembly votes reflect worldwide solidarity with Cuba, adding that Caricom hopes to see this vestige of the Cold War end.

The Association of Southeast Asian nations (ASEAN) was represented by a speaker from Singapore who expressed support for Cuba’s resolution. He applauded progress made in relations between Cuba and the United States, while noting that much remains to be done, most importantly, eliminating the blockade.

(Granma)

The normalization of ties between the two countries will take years and it will be an arduous process because there are difficult problems to resolve as the future of the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo, in eastern Cuba, whose occupation the Cuban government considers illegal, the text says.

The negotiation around the nationalized properties after the triumph of the Cuban Revolution, and other totally divergent items on the internal politics of the Caribbean nation, are also pending, but only the Cubans are the ones who should discuss and resolve them.

Cuba and the United States formally restored diplomatic ties yesterday and turn its interest sections into embassies that worked in the respective capitals since September 1977.

The island’s authorities have reiterated that the economic blockade is the main obstacle in the way to the normalization of bilateral ties and are willing to discuss any issue with Washington, but on the basis of sovereign equality and the non-interference in the internal affairs of the Caribbean nation.

(Prensa Latina)

The 45-day term will expire today. It was stipulated so the legislators -particularly those reluctant to the approach started in December 2014 between Washington and Havana- speak in favor of the decision notified on April 14 by President Barack Obama.

The fact is that an initiative with last-minute bicameral support seems unlikely because the congress people are this week on vacations and would have to move before midnight.

But in late April, the anti-Cuban right-wing congress people had agreed that there was no reasonable maneuver margin to oppose to this step by the Executive, which has been made progresses towards the restoration of diplomatic ties with the island and the reopening of embassies in both capitals.

Cuban authorities have stated -in three rounds of official talks and other contacts- the importance of their country’s removal from that list of nations that allegedly sponsoring terrorism, although they did not established this as a prerequisite for the progress in bilateral talks.

Few days after Obama informed of Cuba’s exclusion from that “blacklist” -in which it stood since 1962- congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a fervent supporter of Washington’s anti-Cuba policy, said in an interview with Foreign Policy: “We could not undo it.”

Her frustration, for lacking political capital in the Capitol corridor, agreed a 59 percent of citizens’ support to the Executive’s decision, according to a survey published by CNN/ORC.

The Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs considered just the U.S. government’s decision to eliminate the island from a list in which it ensured it should never be included.

It also recalled that Caribbean nation was victim of hundreds of terrorist actions that killed 3,478 people and injured 2,099.

Havana also reaffirmed that it rejects and condemns those terrorism actions in all its forms and expressions, as well as any action that is intended to instigate, support, finance or cover such activities.

Few days before Obama’s notification to the Congress, the head of the White House and Cuban President Raul Castro had held a historic -unprecedented- meeting in the context of the Seventh Summit of the Americas, in Panama.

(Prensa Latina)

Although talks between the U.S. and Cuba are already, in themselves, a milestone for two neighboring countries which have lacked formal ties for more than half a century, they only mark the beginning of a much longer and complicated process.

Inaccuracies and distorted information have accompanied this process from the beginning. Granma shares with its readers seven key points which clarify the dimension of what is happening between Havana and Washington and the coming stage.

1. The two Presidents made a decision, now comes the implementation.
On December 17, among other decisions of importance to both peoples, Raúl Castro and Barack Obama simultaneously announced their intention of reestablishing diplomatic relations between Cuba and the United States, severedmore than half a century ago.

However, in order for this step to be realized, the Presidents’ decision must now pass through the official channels of their respective countries.
This process is being advanced by the delegations which met in Havana and Washington for various rounds of conversations and technical encounters.
These meetings are important as they establish the bases on which diplomatic relations will operate, so as not to repeat past mistakes.

2. Neither party has imposed conditions for the reestablishment of relations.

One of the mass media’s main lines of attack against the conversations has been to talk of “conditions” imposed by the two parties.

Both the Cuban and U.S. diplomats have clearly stated that the work environment has been marked by respect and professionalism, with conversations taking place in a climate of reciprocity and free from interference.
What Cuba has done since the beginning of this process is highlight aspects which would must be resolved before further progress can be made; including the end of the country’s unjust inclusion on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, and the restoration of banking services for its mission in Washington, which has been without these services for more than a year.

Reports indicate that both issues are in the process of being resolved.

U.S. representatives have questioned restrictions on the mobility of their staff at a future embassy in Havana (the movements of Cuban diplomats in Washington is currently limited), as well as Cubans’ access to their facilities.

In this regard, Cuba has insisted on the importance of adhering to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic and Consular Relations, which establishes the importance of observing the laws of the host country and not interfering in its internal affairs.

Members of a mission must be able to interact with citizens of the host country, but also respect local norms, a Cuban diplomat recently explained.

3. Reestablishment of relations is not the same as normalization of relations
Another common mistake often made, is confusing the process of reestablishing diplomatic relations with the normalization, which is a longer and more complex process.

After embassies have been opened in both capitals, the challenging search for “normality” between both countries, which share a tumultuous history, will begin.

Cuban authorities have highlighted various points which they consider to be vital to addressing normalization: the lifting of the blockade; the return of the illegally occupied Guantanamo Nalval base territory, an end to subversive radio and television broadcasts; the cancellation of U.S. plans to promote regime change; and compensation for the damages caused to the Cuban people over half a century of aggression, among others.

It has never been stated that these issues need to be resolved in order to open embassies, as some media agencies have erroneously stated, although U.S. authorities have recognized Cuba’s position.
“Completely normal relations do not include an economic embargo, or economic sanctions,” a U.S. State Department official – who asked to remain anonymous – recently stated.

Without a doubt, this new stage includes discussion of other important issues for both countries. But Cuba has clearly expressed that it can not be expected to “give something in exchange.” Cuba does not apply any sanctions on the United States, nor does it have military bases in U.S. territory, or promote regime change.

Likewise, Cuba has said that the U.S. can not demand that the country renounce its ideals of independence and social justice, nor cede a millimeter in its defense of national sovereignty.

4. Washington’s change of policy is a victory for the Cuban people and Latin American integration
It wouldn’t be conceited to recognize, as the majority of the international community has, that Cuba has arrived at this point as a result of almost half a century of heroic struggle and loyalty to its principles.

Likewise, it wouldn’t be possible to analyze a policy change of this magnitude without understanding the new era our region is experiencing, and the firm and courageous demand made by the governments and people of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).

In the 2nd CELAC Summit held in Havana, an unprecedented regional document was signed: the declaration of the hemisphere as a Zone of Peace, which recognizes “The inalienable right of every state to choose its political, economic, social and cultural system, as an essential condition to guarantee peaceful coexistence among nations.”

5. The United States has changed its methods, not its objectives
One of the greatest questions which has followed this process is what does the U.S. policy change entail and how far does it go. There is no easy answer and perhaps it is too early to carry out a thorough analysis.
When President Obama made his announcement, he said that after 50 years of a failed policy, it was time to try something new.

Obama speaking in Panama noted – in reference to Cuba – that “The United States will not be imprisoned by the past – we’re looking to the future.”
However, U.S. authorities have stated on various occasions that its methods, not its objectives, are changing. These objectives have been – since January 1, 1959, to overthrow the Cuban Revolution.

In his speech during the 7th Summit of the Americas, Obama commented, “We’re not in the business of regime change,” remarks which filled many with hope.
However, millions of dollars are still being openly channeled toward financing subversion in Cuba, to which must be added other undeclared funds.

For their part, Cuban authorities have never demonstrated naivety. “No one should dream that the new policy announced means acceptance of the existence of a socialist revolution 90 miles from Florida,” said Raúl in his speech during the 3rd CELAC Summit.

6. Obama can do more
In addition to the December 17 announcement, Obama also implemented a group of measures modifying a small number of blockade regulations, although the aggressive policy remains in force.

Cuba has recognized Obama’s decision to engage in a debate with Congress in order to put an end to the blockade, something no other U.S. president has done.

Nonetheless, reports by the media that the President “has done everything possible,” are false.
If he is determined, Obama can use his broad executive powers to substantially modify the application of the blockade, even without the approval of Congress.

He could – for example – permit, in other sectors of the economy, all that he has authorized in the arena of telecommunications, with evident objectives of political influence in Cuba.
7. The issue of sovereignty is no longer off-limits
One of the lessons of the last five months – and perhaps the last year and a half of discreet conversations – has been that Cuba and the U.S. can address any issue as long as it is done within a framework of respect.

Cuba has demonstrated its willingness to discuss topics which have historically been used and manipulated to attack our county, such as democracy, free speech and human rights, about which the nation has much to show and contribute.
Perhaps the most important point of all, and that which summarizes this article, is that the greatest challenge facing Cuba and the United States is establishing a relationship of civilized co-existence based on respect for their profound differences.

(Granma)

Both sides have expressed optimism regarding the environment that surrounds this third round of talks.

Cuban Foreign Ministry sources commented this week that the just decision by President Barack Obama to exclude our country from the list of state sponsors of terrorism and the progress in regards to ensuring the availability of banking services for the Cuban diplomatic mission in Washington, create a conducive bilateral context to progress in the restoration of diplomatic relations.

A high-ranking U.S. official, who requested anonymity, recently said in a conference call that she hopes that this meeting will serve to iron out the outstanding issues in order to open embassies.

According to reports, one of the focuses of this round of talks will be the functioning of the diplomatic missions and the conduct of officials.

Cuba will insist on compliance with the principles of international law enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations and the obligations set out under the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations and Consular Relations, a diplomatic source from the island added.

As in previous meetings, the Cuban delegation is headed by Josefina Vidal, Ministry of Foreign Relations director general for the United States, whilst the U.S. will be represented by Roberta Jacobson, assistant secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs.

(Granma)

According to the website www.cubaminrex.cu, the director general of the U.S. division at MINREX, Gustavo Machin, stated that efforts are underway to resume the banking services of the Cuban Interest Section in the northern nation.

Those progresses can create an “appropriate bilateral and regional context to move towards the restoration of diplomatic relations and the opening of the embassies,” he noted.

The third round of talks on the restoration of diplomatic relations will take place on Thursday, May 21.

The March meeting was to follow up the issues discussed during the two previous rounds, held in January and February, 2015.

In this round, the delegations should exchange on aspects relating to the functioning of the diplomatic missions and the behavior of their officials.

These are issues that have been discussed in the two previous rounds of talks, and in this round, we will analyze them and they will be part of what we are going to discuss during the May 21 meeting, he said.

Of course, Cuba will insist on the observance of the principles of International Law enshrined in the United Nations Charter and the norms established by the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic and Consular Relations, which should be the basis of the bilateral ties and the functioning of the respective missions, he pointed out.

(Prensa Latina)

In an assessment of the factors that make up the framework of this criminal economic war, experts and witnesses presented evidence – February 28 through March 10 – with compelling statements which demonstrated the responsibility of the U.S. government for systematic actions against Cuba in order to alienate public support for the Revolution, and thus destroy it.

The aggressive policy and its criminal effects on all economic sectors and the social life of the country were placed under scrutiny. As a result, the illegality of the blockade – indeed an act of genocide – in the light of international law was demonstrated, as well as the obligation of the U.S. government to atone for the harm caused by its immoral and illegal conduct, and to pay compensation for the damages caused.

Experts and witnesses demonstrated that since the beginning of the 60s, U.S. government measures against Cuba implied the loss of markets for its exports, as well as it main suppliers, as 70% of trade was previously conducted with the country. In industrial sectors, huge investments for the conversion of production technology were required, with the most adverse affects seen on vital production lines.

The negative financial effect caused by the distance of markets the island was obliged to turn to, in order to acquire all products (including medicines or the raw materials for their manufacture), with the consequent supply interruptions, the need to maintain large stocks and problems of transportation and operations, were all outlined.

The blockade measures attempted to prevent all maritime trade with Cuba. The banning from U.S. ports of ships of any nationality which traded with Cuba was imposed, and in force for 14 years, and after a brief period in which this policy was discontinued, the Torricelli Act in 1992 resumed it, resulting in the rising cost of freight and other damages. The evidence demonstrated the economic losses due to the ban on travel to Cuba by U.S. citizens; the refusal to allow Cuban aircraft to offer commercial flights to the United States, the inability to use the shortest routes to arrive at certain destinations, the resulting additional layovers and necessary use of technologically outdated equipment, together with many other adverse effects.

The abrupt cutoff from traditional sources of financing both within and outside of the United States, and the huge losses due to frozen assets – arbitrarily made use of – dollar exchange rate moves in foreign trade and external debt, damages due to prices and interest rates, the loss of opportunities for credit facilities and other damages to the external financial sector, were also highlighted.

In the cultural sphere, one idea was emphasized: the blockade represented the abrupt elimination of the civilized, normal relations existing between the peoples of the United States and Cuba, thus depriving both nations of the opportunity to access the best of their respective products, with serious effects on Cuban creators.

Strong testimony provided extensive evidence of the damages to the economy as part of the subversive policy of the United States against Cuba, including the huge costs incurred in order to counter it, together with the necessary military mobilizations arising from the ongoing threats of a direct military intervention, and the large numbers of people and resources engaged in the fight against counterrevolutionary groups organized and supplied with means of warfare by the CIA. The costs of the biological war unleashed against Cuba beginning in 1962 were extremely high.

On the final day of testimony, a detailed expert report evaluating damages caused by the economic, commercial and financial blockade in various spheres as well as the attacks on economic and social targets, was presented. By early 2000, the blockade had cut short 15 years worth of development for Cuba.

The damages resulting from the blockade at that time amounted to over $67 billion dollars,[ii] while those resulting from attacks amounted to $54 billion, giving a total of over $121 billion U.S. dollars. The Court ordered the U.S. government to pay reparations and compensation to the Cuban people for this amount.

* First researcher at the Center for Historical Research on State Security. Vice President of the National Union of Cuban Historians (UNHIC) in Havana.

[i] The suit was filed by the CTC, ANAP, FMC, FEU, FEEM, OPJM, CDR and ACRC.

[ii] The cost of the blockade is continually updated. In the 2014 report by the Cuban Foreign Ministry regarding Resolution 68/8 of the UN General Assembly, entitled, “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America against Cuba,” it is stated that at current prices this figure had risen to more than $116.8 billion U.S. dollars. Taking into account the depreciation in the value of the dollar against gold in the international market, this is $1,112,534,000,000 USD.

(Granma)

Two weeks ago, Cuban-born Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (Republican-Florida) introduced a bill in the House of Representatives to reverse the President’s decision. However, her efforts met with resounding failure, and she was forced to withdraw the bill. In doing so, she misleadingly claimed there were no legislative mechanisms which allow for the repeal of the de-listing of Cuba, which is not true, as Congress has the necessary procedures to maintain the designation of a country as a state sponsor of terrorism.

The reality is that the anti-Cuban Congresswoman failed to garner the required support, even among members of the Republican Party, which currently holds the majority in both houses of Congress, to pass a law that would override Obama’s decision and survive a possible presidential veto.

This means that once the 45 days established by law have passed, on May 29, the inclusion of Cuba as a terrorist state will end.

This constitutes an act of historical justice for the Cuban people.

For 33 years the U.S. government unjustifiably kept our country on an ignominious list, on which it never should have been included, as a country that was victim to hundreds of terrorist acts which killed 3,478 people and incapacitated 2,099 Cuban citizens. Cuba has always condemned terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, as well as any action that seeks to provide encouragement, support, financing and concealment of acts of this nature. As a sign of its international commitment, the Cuban state has ratified all conventions and protocols on combating terrorism promoted by the United Nations.

A positive outcome of the presidential decision on Cuba in the legal field, will be the eradication of the possibility of further spurious claims against the Cuban government, as filed in the past by unscrupulous people who, protected by U.S. anti-terrorism laws and with the complicity of courts, especially in Miami, won compensatory damages that allowed them to seize assets frozen in the United States belonging to Cuban state entities, by virtue of our designation as a sponsor of terrorism.

However, the definitive exclusion from this list does not imply any relief from the economic, commercial and financial blockade against Cuba. This is because most of the laws and regulations which established the blockade policy were approved before 1982, when Cuba was declared a state sponsor of terrorism. The sanctions and restrictions that this designation implies were therefore already in place as part of the blockade.

U.S. officials themselves have made clear, following the announcement of President Obama’s decision, that the majority of the restrictions associated with the inclusion of Cuba on the terrorist list will continue, as they are contained in the complex web of sanctions which make up the blockade.

The Trading with the Enemy Act (1917), the Foreign Assistance Act (1961) and the Export Administration Act (1979), which during the early years of the Revolution supported the policy of economic war against Cuba, were enacted prior to 1982, just as the Cuban Assets Control Regulations (1963) and the Export Administration Regulations (1979), issued to implement that which was codified within these laws. Subsequently, other laws such as the Torricelli (1992), the Helms-Burton Act (1996) and the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act, intensified the bans on transactions with Cuba, with a marked extraterritorial character.

For example, among the transactions prohibited by law, arising from the inclusion of a country on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, are the export of military equipment and dual-use technology (civil and military), the granting of foreign assistance and the development of government aid programs, the provision of loans and credits by international financial institutions, and the adoption of systems of trade preferences and commercial rates. All these restrictions will remain in force for Cuba, despite its de-listing, in compliance with the laws and regulations of the blockade.

The removal from the list, due to its positive symbolic and political effect, could have some impact on the perception of Cuba as a risk country by financial institutions and alleviate – though not eliminate – the fear of banks, especially foreign, of maintaining relations with our country.

This reflects the fact that following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States strengthened its laws and regulations on the financial sector to combat the financing of terrorism, which had a further negative impact on those states singled out as sponsors of terrorism, which have been the object of true harassment and persecution of their financial operations over the last five years, under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

Nevertheless, Cuba will continue to be considered a significant risk in financial matters, as it is subjected to a regime of unilateral economic sanctions by the U.S. government. It is worth remembering that when foreign banks refuse to work with Cuba, they do so for two reasons: due to its designation as a terrorist state and due to being a country sanctioned by the U.S. blockade.

Testament to this is the fact that the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the Treasury Department, responsible for ensuring compliance with the blockade regulations and penalizing U.S. and foreign banking institutions that violate these, has upheld the persecution of Cuban financial transactions, even after the announcements of December 17, 2014. The billion-dollar fines imposed on the German bank Commerzbank ($1.71 billion) and U.S. online payment company PayPal ($7,658,300) this March, demonstrate the continued enforcement of this policy and its marked extraterritorial nature.

While the removal of Cuba from the list implies virtually no change in the application of the blockade, it is a just measure and has been welcomed by the public in the United States. A media survey by website New Jersey, NJ.com, revealed that 64% of U.S. citizens believe the President made the right decision.

This action by the White House allows for progress in the process of restoring diplomatic relations between both countries. But, in order to normalize ties with Cuba, among other important pending issues, the United States should fully lift the blockade.

Just as Cuba should never have been included on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, because the country has never promoted or supported terrorist acts, it should not remain subject to the most overarching and prolonged system of unilateral economic, commercial and financial sanctions ever imposed on a nation. It is time for the blockade to come to an end.

(Paula Martínez, Granma)