It refers that those people participated in eight illegal departures from the country between the end of May and June 3 by the sea, most of them in rustic means, putting their lives at risk.

Some of them even stole a boat linked to the Santa Cruz del Norte Sport Fishing Base, in Mayabeque (east of Havana).

With them, 313 people were returned by the US authorities in 2021, the press release refers.

The communiqué further states that the Cuban government has insisted on the need for strict compliance with the Cuba – US Joint Declaration on migration issues, dated on January 12, 2017.

Such agreement embodied the bilateral commitment to prevent irregular migration and prevent risky departures from Cuba, combat related acts of violence, and resolutely discourage related illegalities.

It also provides for the promotion of effective bilateral cooperation to thwart and prosecute human trafficking and related crimes.

The MININT’s text also refers that in accordance with the letter of that deal, Cuba reiterates and defends regular, safe and orderly migration, and urges the US side to comply with the commitment to guarantee the legal transfer from Cuba of a minimum of 20,000 people per year.

(Taken from Prensa Latina)

“The closure of the U.S. Consulate in Havana, the transfer of services to third countries and the maintenance of the Cuban Adjustment Act of 1966 threaten safe, orderly and regular migration,” the Foreign Minister stated, in a clear allusion to the causes that lead to regrettable events such as the recent rescue of eight persons and the recovery of two bodies following the sinking of their boat near Key West, Florida.

The survivors, who were part of a group of illegal immigrants attempting to reach the U.S. coast from Cuba, warned that another ten people remain missing after the accident.

How many more lives must be sacrificed in the name of absurd and criminal measures meant to force the Cuban people to surrender and put an end to the Revolution?

As part of the escalation of aggressive policies toward the island in March of 2019, the U.S. government announced a reduction, for Cuban citizens, of the time B2 visas remain valid, from five years to three months, with a single entry.

The measure came in addition to the unjustified interruption of access to visas for Cubans on the island, forcing them to travel to third countries to apply, with no guarantee that a visa would be granted, along with continued U.S. non-compliance with the visa quota established by Migration Agreements.

(Taken from Granma)

This is why the Ministry of Communications established Resolution 141/2020 outlining general guidelines to make this process viable within Central State Administration bodies and agencies, the Central Bank of Cuba, the General Customs of the Republic, the Institute of Physical Planning and the National Statistics and Information Office, which include a schedule that began in 2020 and must be completed by 2024.

According to the document, the migration involves operating systems of technological nodes, servers and private data centers supporting computer systems, as well as personal desktop and laptop computers, all of which are connected to the Internet.

On the other hand, each one of the above mentioned organizations and institutions must prepare their own migration schedules in order to guarantee completion of the process by December 2024, and are obliged to establish contractual relationships with developers and other entities, to ensure technical advisory services and training of their personnel.

(Taken from Granma)

This is confirmed by the fact that a total of 623,831 Cubans living abroad visited the country in 2019, “evidence of the strengthening of ties between Cuba and its citizens,” said Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, who added on his Twitter account that 552,816, of that total, came from the United States.

Hostile U.S. actions, which remain in effect, hinder the normal flow of Cubans traveling abroad and those traveling to Cuba, particularly to and from the United States, thus making normal communication among Cuban families difficult, confirming the Foreign Minister’s statement: “Cuba opens and the United States closes.”

According to Ernesto Soberón Guzmán, director of Consular Affairs and Cubans Living Abroad at the Foreign Ministry, more than three million arrivals to national territory by Cubans living abroad have been recorded over the last six years.

This trend also represents the reality of Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel’s comments in September of 2018, when he met with 150 Cuban residents in the United States, in New York, and stated: “We are counting on you. We are Cuba.”

This commitment has also been reflected in work carried out by the 166 associations of Cubans living in 79 countries, which support the country’s principal international objectives, Soberón stated, reaffirming at the XIII Regional Conference of Cubans in Europe, at the end of 2018, that the strengthening of relations between the island and its citizens abroad is a continuous and irreversible process.

To further strengthen these ties between the government and Cubans living abroad, Havana will host the Fourth Conference on Nation and Emigration April 8-10, 2020, at a time when the United States is reinforcing its attacks with unilateral measures restricting commercial flights to Cuba.

(Granma)

From Eritrea, Ethiopia, Tanzania, Syria, Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia, Gambia… they come, heading to Europe, to the former colonial powers that plundered their countries.

How to reach the continent is more uncertain. Exposed to Mediterranean crossings crowded into vessels of all kinds, they pay sums that range from 3,000 to 8,000 euros. Migrants must sell everything they have, if they have anything, or offer themselves as modern day slaves, subjected to various forms of abuse.

Hundreds of thousands arrive, but thousands do not reach their desired destination; they perish drowning or attacked by sharks in the vast graveyard that the Mediterranean has become. The exact number is not known.

This description is only part of the reality, which includes the refusal of some European countries to accept them, the inhospitable camps where they are taken, deportations, imprisonment, walls topped with barbed wire along borders to prevent their moving from one nation to another. Not to mention, racism and xenophobia that continue within a capitalist social system based on exploitation.

Libya, a North African country that has become ungovernable, is used as the launching point for migrants looking to reach Europe. There, the International Organization for Migration warns of “the purchasing of many immigrants as if they were veritable slaves,” in the 21st century; but now with dollars and euros used by the trafficking mafias operating with impunity in the nation.

The issue was addressed during the recent Brussels Summit, where disagreement between countries in southern Europe and those to the center and north has created a major rupture within the European Union. Italy and Greece feel alone as they face the arrival of thousands of immigrants from Africa and the Middle East, while nations in the north and center of the continent accuse them of failing to police their Mediterranean coastlines.

Jean Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, commented on the issue, stressing “the fragility of the European Union is increasing – cracks are growing in size, we need to find a consistent response now to the migration crisis.”

This was evident when, during the Summit, it was agreed that all members would help rescued migrants, but no details were established as to who would do so, or how. Similarly, all agreed on the creation of “secure migration centers,” where those seeking asylum for “genuine” reasons would be identified, and irregular migrants housed until they were returned to their countries of origin.

The accord, however, does not clarify in which states these centers will be located. And more controversial is the lack of any explanation as to how a “secure center” is defined, leading many to fear the proliferation of prison camps for immigrants who reach Europe, according to BBC Mundo.

An approach that is more than a little late is the idea presented by some European leaders of promoting greater investment in Africa, to help the continent achieve substantive socio-economic change, so people do not leave their countries in search of a better life.

We can only hope that the adage “better late than never” holds true, and that African nations receive foreign investment and other forms of collaboration to at least reduce hunger and disease. May the chilling UNICEF figures be taken into consideration, like those indicating that every day, across the continent, 2,600 babies die in the first 24 hours of their lives. Ethiopia and Tanzania top the list of the world’s countries with the highest neonatal mortality rates.

To date, the many summits on the migration issue have yet to show positive results.

As long as the focus remains on palliative measures, and the root of the problem is ignored, migration will continue to be a nightmare for Europe. Or more accurately, as long as the debt owed Africa and colonized countries for centuries of exploitation is not paid, these so-called solutions will be no more than band-aids and mercurochrome for a deep wound.

According to official data, more than 65.6 million persons around the world have been obliged to abandon their homes because of internal conflicts and precarious living conditions. Of this total, some 22.5 million are refugees, with half of these being under 18 years of age.

Solving the equation does not require much mathematical knowledge, or that of any other kind. Underway is massive emigration from impoverished countries, whose resources have been plundered and where infant mortality is measured in double digits. In many of these, governmental chaos, internecine conflicts, religious discord, and the lack of investment to overcome underdevelopment are constants in everyday life – with no future in sight.

Millions take their chances at sea, to seek a different destiny, so life has some meaning.

(Granma)

Etched in his memory is July 4, 1962, the day he boarded Pan American Airways Flight 422, at 11:45 am. As he climbed the stairway, he wanted to return, and took a few steps back without turning around to see his mother, who had warned him not to take a final look.

He described the trip as frightening, the 45 saddest minutes of his life; there was no consolation. From the steel bird, as he called the plane, he saw the palms grow small, then the sea, and finally an unknown country: the United States.

Traveling with him were 10 other children, all without their families, and unaware that they were victims of Operation Peter Pan – a U.S. orchestrated wave of emigration, caused by distortions and lies disseminated to destroy the Cuban Revolution, during which 14,000 children were taken from the country.
His first days were hard, López recounted, living in a camp of Army tents, among older boys, where abuse and hostility reigned. His supposed protectors, Catholic priests and nuns, found it difficult to control the 500 adolescents, between 12 and 18 years of age, housed at the camp. All kinds of physical violence occurred, even sexual abuse by the priests themselves.

These experiences accentuated his love for Cuba, and after completing his university studies in Tourism, he created the travel agency Interplanner Travels, devoted to promoting group trips from the United States to socialist states in Eastern Europe. He established close ties with Cuban friendship centers in these nations, where he bought books and music, and heard news of the Revolution.

How did the first trip to Cuba come about?
Given my relationship with socialist bloc countries, the Cuban mission to the United Nations took interest in my work, during the administration of Jimmy Carter (1977- 1981), who made traveling to the island somewhat easier. I talked with the Cuban diplomats about the possibility of opening up tourism with Cuba. Returning was always in my plans, but I never thought I would do so on the invitation of the revolutionary government.

Direct flights were prohibited, so we flew from Canada in 1978. The first group was composed of professors and workers at Martyrs University in Keith.

To my surprise, on this trip I met the leader Fidel Castro. He visited us at the Hotel Riviera. I was talking with the tourists at the main entrance, where we were waiting for our bus. I suddenly noticed that some in the group changed their expressions, widening their eyes in amazement. I thought I had said something wrong in English, but then I felt someone touch me on the shoulder, like a friend, and when I turned around, I was surprised too, speechless.

Fidel greeted us casually and said we should call him by his first name, as a friend. He took interest in hearing if the academics were feeling good in Cuba and if the tour program was being conducted without difficulty. I never had any problems, not with this group, or any other I brought here.

This type of specialized tourism must have faced obstacles from different administrations? What has been the greatest problem?

One of the most notorious was during the Presidency of Ronald Reagan (1981 -1989). I was ordered to close my office in Washington within 24 hours. We had to close a well-established company.

Fortunately, we kept our contacts and when there was a change at the White House, with the George H.W. Bush administration, we were able to re-establish the exchanges, at first with many more restrictions than at the beginning.

It is always a big problem making bank transfers to Cuba and can wear down anyone who wants to work.

Now with the Donald Trump administration, it’s practically impossible to find a bank to transfer funds. Plus tourists see the travel warning issued by the State Department, which claims that Cuba is not a safe country and that if any accident or illness should occur here, no insurance company would take responsibility.

For this reason, in 2017, we had 30 group cancellations, because no one wanted to travel to a supposedly dangerous location, much less when a government institution says so. They hide behind the alleged sonic attacks. I can tell you that, if they existed, I would be deaf. All we hear is the live music of bands.

In reality, the President is responding to the interests of a miniscule group of Cubans residing in Florida who have created a type of mafia, they amass personal fortunes erecting barriers to bilateral relations. They live off this business, because there are millions of dollars available to finance campaigns against the Cuban Revolution that have no effect.

I never thought I would witness a visit by a U.S. President, but I saw it with Barack Obama. He recognized that the economic blockade policy was not having the desired effect, in terms of overthrowing the Revolution, and therefore sought other strategies.

He didn’t have these bilateral talks because of goodwill or falling in love with Cuba. His tactics involved creating an atmosphere of rapprochement and direct conversations between the two governments. Perhaps a normal relationship could have been achieved with the reestablishment of diplomatic relations, but the current administration is undoing what had been accomplished. The differences between Cuba and the United States are not going to be solved, because the U.S. is obsessed with controlling and colonizing Cuba, just as happened in Puerto Rico.

I see it as a fatal attraction. The Yankee coveting Cuba’s strength.

How do you do promotional work in such a hostile environment, to coordinate group trips to Cuba?
By getting around the obstacles and adjusting to the circumstances. I dedicate hours of my life to conversing, dialoguing, with people. I introduce myself to professional organizations, universities, and other groups to attract them. We promote ourselves on the internet and use the experiences of those who have visited Cuba, since they are always pleasantly surprised.

Many people come with an unfounded fear of Communism. They have expressed absurd opinions, thinking they will be strictly supervised and constantly watched by spies. They think there is no freedom to walk the streets.

I explain that it is a place with a functioning socialist system, very different from other social systems around the world. When they return, they say they never imagined Cuba as a safe country, with no danger whatsoever. They return home excited to have learned of the existence of an educated, well informed people, who know how to settle problems between governments. This bridge of friendship is one that requires daily work.

Why has your love of Cuba been a constant in your work?

My biological parents always taught me to never be a traitor. I believe that when I left Cuba, the family thought I would be coming back soon. It was a five year separation. I felt I had lost my childhood. I promised myself I would return, and recover what had been taken from me, because I did not abandon it.

I was born in Matanzas, and whenever I visit my elementary school, I remember the morning ceremony there, when the children salute the flag in front of a bust of José Martí. This image of lining up every day, separated by the length of our right arms, and then singing the Cuban national anthem, I have never been able to forget.

The life of an immigrant is hard. In my case, I don’t feel I belong on one side or the other. I am in the environment identified as Cuban slash American, but this is not a nationality. I do not consider myself Cuban-American, or a Cuban who is a U.S. citizen. I think my life has been on this long pipeline that never ends. I live there, not on one side or the other.

The people of the country accepted me. They helped me and a family adopted me; they saved me. Now I’m bringing them for the first time. I always remember some of Fidel’s words in a conversation with one of my groups. He told us that even when we weren’t present, this was our home, where we could lay our heads.

The Mulvihill family, residents of New Jersey, told Granma International how they welcomed Alex into their home, until he was reunited with his biological parents.

Kathleen, wife and mother, recalled that, at that time, her husband worked as a Science teacher and talked about a very intelligent and affectionate Cuban boy in one of his classes. Later, they were visited by a social worker, who told them about the adoption process. They thought their two-bedroom house might be too small for another child, since they had two young daughters. (The Mulvihills later moved and two more daughters were born.)

The social worker looked at the living room couch and said they were in perfect conditions to receive Alex. Her husband Michael was 24 and she was 23, so they accepted the challenge, and it turned out to be a very positive experience, Kathleen said.

Michael emphasized that what motivated him was thinking about how hard it must have been for the biological parents to send a child away to another country. Alex quickly became the boy in the house they never had, and grew to be a much-needed member of the family.

Both say that Alex brought much happiness to their home, helping with the care of his little sisters, and later with their homework. Alex taught them to eat black beans, plantains, and other Cuban dishes. When his biological parents, Osvaldo and Victoria, arrived in the United States, they lived close by, became friends, and continued to enjoy Cuban food together.

The couple reported that they made their first visit to Cuba to see the country Alex talked about. They wanted to visit the place where he was born and where he went to school. They were amazed by their interactions with the Cuban people. Kathleen is a nurse – a daughter and grand-daughter have followed in her footsteps – and she praised the attention given pregnant women in Cuba.

Michael commented that he admired Cuba’s educational system, saying he was impressed with the country’s academic achievements.

When asked if they would make a second trip, without hesitation both answered at the same time, affirmatively. •

OPERATION PETER PAN

• Operation Peter Pan was launched by the U.S. government, at the end of 1960, as an attempt to destroy the Cuban Revolution which had triumphed in 1959. Among its principal organizers were James Baker and the priest Bryan O. Walsh. Perhaps the name chosen for the operation, Peter Pan, was fitting given the code name used for Miami: Never, Neverland.

• The maneuvers of these two encouraged parents of 14,000 Cuban children to send them to the U.S. between December of 1960 and October, 1962, using fake news about a supposed law to be enacted giving the revolutionary state parental power over minors.

• A huge media campaign was launched, principally on Radio Swan – a counterrevolutionary broadcaster in the service of U.S. intelligence agencies that could be heard in Cuba – sounding an alarm to frighten mothers October 26, 1960, and calling on them not to allow their children to be stolen.

• Working in Cuba was CIA agent José Pujals Mederos, who wrote the fake law and introduced it in the country, with the support of another CIA operative, Ramón Grau Alsina, nephew of Ramón Graú San Martín, former President during the semi-colonial republic. This team manufactured false passports and visas through the terrible program for unaccompanied minor Cuban refugees that served as the legal framework to allow for the presence of the children in the U.S.

• The children waited long years for family reunification and many were traumatized by physical and emotional harm in the improvised camps, where little professional attention was provided. Analysts point out that parents were not thinking about a reunification in the United States, but rather one in Cuba, with the return of their children after the revolutionary government was overthrown.

(Granma)

According to the source, the meeting took place on March 22 and 23, and it culminated with the signing of a document that reflects the agreements adopted in the working sessions.

The Canadian part was presided over by the Vice President of the Border Services Agency, Jacques Cloutier, while the host delegation was headed by the Director of Consular Affairs and of Cuban Residents Abroad (DACCRE), Ernesto Soberón.

According to the Foreign Ministry of the Caribbean country, the round of talks served to analyze migratory problems of mutual interest and continue to develop mechanisms that contribute to the achievement of a regular, safe and orderly migration.

Also this week, the ambassador of Cuba in Canada, Josefina Vidal, presented her credentials in Ottawa.

Before coming to the capital of the northern nation, Vidal played important roles in Cuban diplomacy, including as Director General of the United States of the Foreign Ministry, a position from which he participated in the process of rapprochement Havana-Washington.

(Prensa Latina)

• Eliminate the “Habilitación” (authorization) of passports previously required of Cuban émigrés traveling to the country

• Authorize the entrance and departure, to and from Cuba, of Cuban citizens residing abroad on recreational vessels, via the international tourist marinas Hemingway and Gaviota-Varadero. Once conditions have been created, this option will be gradually expanded to other marinas.

• Permit entrance to the country of Cuban citizens who left illegally, with the exception of those who did so via the United States Naval Base in Guantánamo.

• Eliminate the requirement of “avecindamiento” (residence in Cuba for 90 days) for children of Cubans residing abroad, who were born outside the country, to obtain Cuban citizenship and identification documents.

With these decisions, continuity is given to regulations adopted in January of 2013, as part of an effort by the country to further strengthen relations with our émigré community, a process which was begun in 1978 by Comandante en Jefe de la Revolución Fidel Castro Ruz.

In the meantime, the U.S. government has decided to drastically reduce personnel at its embassy in Havana and suspend the granting of visas at its consulate. Cuban citizens must now travel to Colombia to apply for an immigrant visa, and to other countries for other types of U.S. visas, without any guarantee that they will be granted, thus making the process considerably more expensive and practically impossible. This will directly affect Cuban families, who, in the future, will not be able to obtain visas in Havana, thus facing greater obstacles to visiting relatives, as well as those who wish to emigrate.

The unjustified, arbitrary decision to expel from the United States 17 officials working at the Cuban embassy in Washington, including a significant portion of the staff at the consulate, will have a negative impact on consular services and make trips to our country by Cubans residing there difficult.

The Cuban government will continue to study new measures to update our migratory policy.

Shortly, various legal norms, which will allow for the implementation of these measures, will be published in the Official Gazette, and the population will be provided additional information on the procedures that will enter into effect.

This information will also be available at the Interior Ministry’s 189 processing centers, in all of the country’s municipalities; at the Public Attention Office of the Identification, Immigration, and Foreigners’ Affairs Directorate, via the telephone number 18808; as well as the website http://www.nacionyemigracion.cu; and on the web pages of Cuban embassies and consulates around the world.

(Granma)

The island’s representative Luis Alberto Amorós noted that in order to analyze the issue in depth, it is important to address the causes which lead millions of people to migrate every year, sometimes risking their lives, in search of greater well-being.

“The many problems associated with migration, such as the exponential increase in migrants to industrialized nations, the brain-drain on developing countries, and exacerbation of shameful discrimination and abuses against migrants can only be tackled by attacking the structural causes of the phenomenon,” he stated.

During the meeting on the human rights of migrants, Amorós stressed the need to substantially modify the unjust and exclusionary international economic order, in order to target the root cause of the phenomena.

He added that “A genuine commitment is needed from the major industrial nations, characterized by peace and international security, while they must also abandon their hegemonic interests which produce situations of instability.”

In this sense the Cuban representative noted that international cooperation must be directed toward dialogue and genuine collaboration, which acknowledges the shared responsibility of all states regarding migration, and respects the sovereignty and equality of all countries.
“This cooperation must obviously ensure the integrity, dignity and well-being of migrants,” he stated.

(Prensa Latina)

Promulgated during the height of the Cold War by the Lyndon B. Johnson administration, the law gives the Attorney General the authority to grant, at his or her discretion, permanent residency to any Cuban who enters U.S. territory.

This preferential treatment, that the U.S. Immigration Service offers no other nationality, seeks in fact to promote illegal immigration from Cuba, to destabilize and discredit the country, as a complement to the economic, commercial and financial blockade.

It is difficult to estimate the number of Cubans who may have died in the waters of the Florida Straits or along other routes, over the course of the last 50 years, as a result of this policy.

Added to the Cuban Adjustment Act in 1995 was the even more criminal “wet foot/dry foot” policy, which stipulates that any Cuban who reaches U.S. territory has the right to remain, while those intercepted at sea are returned to the island.

Washington’s decision to use the natural movement of people between two countries as a weapon to attack the Revolution has led to critical moments in the past, from Camarioca in 1965 and Mariel in 1980, to the “boat crisis” of 1994.

The migratory agreements currently in effect between Cuba and the United States were signed after the last two migration crises, and state that the two countries are committed to working together to ensure “legal, orderly and secure” migration.

Nonetheless, the Cuban Adjustment Act and the “wet foot/dry foot” policy contradict the letter and spirit of these agreements, constituting the principal stimulus to illegal emigration; trafficking in persons; the irregular entry into the U.S. of Cuban citizens through third countries; and migratory document fraud, as Cuban authorities have repeatedly pointed out.

Just as the blockade remains largely intact, U.S. migratory law and policies toward Cuba are reflective of the aggression the two countries proposed to overcome as of December 17, 2014. But two years since the historic announcements by Presidents Raúl Castro and Barack Obama, nothing has changed.

According to experts, the “wet foot/dry foot” policy is a matter of Presidential authority and its elimination would require no cooperation from Congress. Moreover, the President can decide how the Cuban Adjustment Act is to be implemented, even though its revocation is in the hands of Congress.

A REGIONAL PROBLEM

It is increasingly clear that Washington’s selective migratory policy affects not only Cuba. The Parole Program for Medical Professionals, in effect since the past decade, encourages Cuban international collaborators to desert their missions, to the detriment of countries where they are providing vital services, while allowing the U.S. to appropriate talent and skills developed by the Revolution under the most difficult conditions.

Latin America has also begun to feel the effect directly. A growing number of Cubans use complicated land routes to reach the U.S. through South America and Mexico, taking advantage of the Cuban Adjustment Act’s benefits. Along the way, they are exposed to traffickers and criminal gangs that profit from exploiting migrants, putting their lives, and even those of their children, in danger.

Foreign ministers from nine countries in the region recently sent Secretary of state John Kerry a letter asking him to encourage the White House to address the problem.

The message signed by Ecuador, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama and Peru states, “Public law 89-732 from 1966, known as the Cuban Adjustment Act, and the policy commonly called “wet foot/dry foot” have become, in this context, a stimulus to disorderly, irregular, and unsafe movement of Cuban citizens who, risking their lives, travel through our countries with the purpose of reaching any point along the U.S. border.”

The Foreign Ministers stated that a review of U.S. policies would be an important first step to halt “the worsening of this complex situation and part of a definitive solution to assure ordered, regular migration in our region.”

The United States, however, turned a deaf ear once again, and spokespeople from both the White House and the State Department were emphatic in stating that no changes were being contemplated.

Despite the measures taken by nations involved, with Cuba’s collaboration, the flow of Cubans using land routes to reach the U.S. has not stopped. According to data from the U.S. Border Patrol, more than 46,000 Cubans entered the country’s territory via Mexico in the first ten months of the current year.

VERY DIFFERENT INTENTIONS

There are those advocating for an end to the Cuban Adjustment Act for purposes which are very different from those motivating Cuba, the international community, and some segments within the United States.

The same people who have for decades been the main promoters in Congress of an aggressive policy toward their country of origin, and today defend policies of the past, have begun to propose changes in the area of immigration

“In essence, our existing law treats all Cubans categorically as if they were refugees whether or not they can prove it,” Florida Republican, Marco Rubio, said on the Senate floor.

“It’s difficult to justify someone’s refugee status when, after arriving in the United States, they are traveling back to the place they are quote/unquote fleeing from, 10, 15, 20, 30 times a year,” he added.

This same idea was defended by Ileana Ros Lehtinen, who recently told the press that Cubans residing in the U.S. who want to come and go from their native country should emigrate via the normal process, and not on the basis of the Cuban Adjustment Act.

Rubio is supporting a Senate bill similar to one introduced in the House of Representatives by Carlos Curbelo, also of Cuban origin. Their objective is not to eliminate current legislation, but rather to oblige Cubans to demonstrate that they are truly being politically persecuted, to take advantage of the privileges afforded by the Cuban Adjustment Act.

In other words, Rubio and Curbelo want to strengthen the original goal of the law, and promote claims by potential emigrants against the Cuban state, to obtain asylum. A position which is moreover directed toward coercing émigrés to denounce their country if they hope to maintain contact with their family and friends on the island.

THE CUBAN-AMERICAN COMMUNITY

Cuban immigration to the U.S. is not a recent phenomenon. In the 19th century there was already a Cuban presence in cities like New York, Tampa, and Key West. The community there has played an important role in the country’s history beginning with its support to independence struggles.

The triumph of the Revolution marked a new, confrontational stage in this relationship. But there is a world of difference between the first waves of emigrants of the bourgeoisie and those close to the Batista dictatorship, and those currently choosing to emigrate.

As experts agree, current Cuban emigration is motivated by the same reasons it is across the region, fundamentally the result of marked economic inequality between the North and the South.

In the case of the Cuban community in the United States, demographic and political changes have become increasingly evident over the last decade, and especially since the announcements of December 17, 2014.

Studies and surveys indicate majority support in the Cuban-American community for the normalization of relations between the two countries and an end to the blockade, for the first time in history.

An unprecedented result from Florida International University’s most recent survey showed that 74.4% of Cuban-Americans living in Miami-Dade County held the opinion that the blockade has not worked “at all” or “not very well,” while 53.3% supported its elimination.

It is the youngest, and those most recently arrived, raised in their majority during the hard times of the Special Period, who are most convinced that the blockade is a failure, and support better relations between the two countries.

For example, 93% of those who arrived in the United States after 1995, and 87% of youth between 18 and 39 years of age favor the elimination of all restrictions on travel to their native country.

Since 2013, Cuba has made significant changes in its migratory policies to reduce the documentation required for trips, and promote orderly, secure travel.

On the contrary, the United States continues with laws and policies rooted in the Cold War.

(Granma)