2015-02-09
A New and Improved U.S. Foreign Policy
Nothing says sincerity like a Carrier Strike Group and a U.S. Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
2015-02-05
White House Meets With Radical Islamic Terrorist Group
State Dept Doubles Down on Meeting Muslim Brotherhood
BY ELLIOT FRIEDLAND
2015 FEBRUARY 4
U.S. State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki told reporters that there was no problem with the government’s meeting with a Muslim Brotherhood delegation this week. She also explicitly affirmed the State Department had no issue with the photographs taken by a member of the delegation displaying the Islamist "Rabia" hand sign inside the State Department after the meeting.
The Egyptian Foreign Minister Sameh Shokry expressed shock at the State Department’s decision, saying that other countries should respect Egyptian law. The foreign minister was referring to the fact that Egypt as declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. (The Brotherhood has also been designated as a terrorist group by Russia, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates as well.) Shokry added that he doesn’t understand why the U.S. would be communicating with “sides that are involved in terrorist acts in Egypt.”
Psaki clarified that the event was organized by the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy (CSID), rather than by Georgetown, which she had claimed earlier. When asked by a reporter whether the State Department intends to continue its relationship with CSID she answered that they would have no problem with it.
According to the Muslim Brotherhood’s official statement on the meetings, the delegation was comprised of Dr. Maha Azzam, Judge Walid Al-Sharabi (secretary-general of the Egyptian Revolutionary Council and a spokesman for Judges for Egypt, a group reported to have close connections to the Brotherhood), Dr. Gamal Heshmat (a top Brotherhood member) and Dr. Abdul-Mawgood Dardery (a Brotherhood member who served in the parliament).
They claim that the delegation, sent under the banner of the ‘”Egyptian Revolutionary Council,” had meetings with “representatives from the White House, US State Department, members of the US Congress, and a number of American research centers.”
This week, a few days after the meeting, the Muslim Brotherhood expressed their intentions to open “a new phase” of “long, unrelenting jihad” on their Arabic website. The article exhorted followers to undertake strenuous efforts for the cause and concluded:
“For everyone must be aware that we are in the process of a new phase in which we summon what of our power is latent within us, and we call to mind the meaning of Jihad, and prepare ourselves and our children, wives and daughters, and whoever marches on our path for a long, unrelenting Jihad. We ask in it the abodes of the martyrs.”
However, at the same time on their English website the Brotherhood released an article proclaiming their supposed long standing commitment to non-violence. This brazen disparity between the group's English statements and their Arabic ones has been long noted by Egyptian commentators such as Mohamed Salmawi who noted "In English, the Muslim Brotherhood says one thing and in Arabic something completely different."
Case in point: While Heshmat was in Washington discussing matters with the U.S. State Department, his son, Khaled Gamal Heshmat, also a Brotherhood supporter, posted on Twitter an incendiary message glamorizing and glorifying the terrorist attack on Egyptian army bases in the Sinai Peninsula that killed at least 35 people last Thursday.
Although Islamic State affiliate Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis claimed responsibility for the attack, Egypt blamed the Muslim Brotherhood and its efforts to depose President Sisi for the massacre.
The Brotherhood's official 10-point statement on the meetings asserted that “The Egyptian Revolution is non-violent. Recent events and entities that began to be formed to respond to the military crimes are a reaction to the absence of justice and neutral judiciary in Egypt...”
Although it claims that the revolution is non-violent, it is immediately followed by a reference to the attacks by terrorists in the Sinai justifying them by saying that they are a reaction to “military crimes” and “the absence of justice.” The statement justified the jihadists by terming them a “reaction,” with no criticism of armed struggle.
This dovetails with the group’s Arabic post declaring the onset of a new phase of jihad.
Although the statement mentions that, “The only legitimacy belongs with the Egyptian people” it neglects to mention that 15 to 30 million Egyptian people came out onto the streets demanding the resignation of Muslim Brotherhood President Muhammed Morsi after only one year of his rule.
Instead, the statement by the Muslim Brotherhood group on the meetings in Washington concludes by saying that “the Revolution is the only strategic option to break the military coup.”
Given that the statement also says that further follow-up meetings will take place, why are U.S. government officials meeting with a group openly devoted to the overthrow of the government of an important strategic ally and the replacement of that government with a caliphate governed by sharia law?
Elliot Friedland is a research fellow at Clarion Project.
2015-01-29
And So It Has Come To Pass!
"As democracy is perfected, the office of the President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and complete narcissistic moron."
- H. L. Mencken, The Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920
2015-01-27
Absence of White House Strategy Makes ISIS, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan Wars Unwinnable
Victory in military campaigns against the Islamic State group, the Taliban, the Haqqanis and others means nothing without concrete plans, retired top commanders say.
by Paul D. Shinkman
U.S. News & World Report
2015 January 27
An absence of clear policies from the White House makes it impossible for the U.S. to achieve any sort of victory in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere in the region, according to three former top military officers who oversaw recent wars there.
“[We need to] come out from our reactive crouch and take a firm, strategic stance in defense of our values,” retired Marine Gen. Jim Mattis said to Congress Tuesday morning.
“America needs a refreshed national security strategy,” he added, saying that it must look beyond the string of crisis “currently consuming the executive branch.”
The notoriously blunt combat commander and former head of U.S. Central Command was testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee alongside retired Navy Adm. William Fallon, also a former CentCom chief, and former Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. John Keane.
They spoke to new members of the Senate, which for the first time includes veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, such as Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, who was on the dais at Tuesday’s hearing.
The three former commanders highlighted what they see as a common problem among top conflicts sucking in U.S. forces deployed abroad, and threats to the American people at home.
The U.S. has been in a “strategy-free” stance in Iraq for some time, and it didn’t begin with the Obama administration, Mattis said. He applauded President Barack Obama for visiting Saudi Arabia this week to reinforce ties with the longtime Middle Eastern ally, and for using U.S. influence to help oust Nouri al-Maliki, the polarizing former Iraqi prime minister.
But many countries in the region, including the Saudis, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan, remain confused about what America hopes to achieve there while stating its goal remains to pivot to the Pacific.
“We’ve disappointed a lot of friends out there, from Abu Dabi to Riyadh, from Tel Aviv to Cairo,” Mattis said.
Keane, a Vietnam veteran, helped oversee the initial invasion of Iraq and became one of the most vocal advocates following his 2003 retirement for increasing the number of troops deployed to the war there. Keane, along with Mattis and Fallon, criticized Obama’s preference for ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on a preconceived deadline, instead of weighing progress on the ground, he says.
The U.S. fight against Islamic extremism should resemble something closer to U.S. efforts to contain communist ideology wrought by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, he said Tuesday.
A “policy of disengagement in the Middle East” has contributed to the rise of such extremism, he said, conceding that the appeal of groups like the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria, or al-Qaida in Pakistan or Yemen, would still exist were it not for U.S. intervention in the region.
The U.S. must focus on gathering allies who share similar values and political beliefs to confront his threat, he said, or it remains doomed to face the same problems again. This is particularly important ahead of the reported massive offensive against the Islamic State group in the key Iraqi city of Mosul and in Anbar province this spring.
“Will there be something after ISIS to deal with?” he said, using a common alternative name for the Islamic State group. “You bet, if we don’t take a comprehensive approach to deal with it.”
Mattis offered a similar example in Syria, saying it remains unclear what the administration hopes to achieve politically in that country.
A civil war between the regime of President Bashar Assad and an opposition movement flared up in early 2011 amid the so-called “Arab Spring.” Extremists from al-Qaida in Iraq crossed the border into the active war zone, where they found safe haven, giving them time to arm, train and supply before launching a new offensive back into Iraq as the Islamic State group.
The Obama administration kept the civil war at arms length, refusing on multiple occasions to openly fund and arm the opposition movement, or to conduct unilateral airstrikes. That changed last summer when the U.S. began a continuing air campaign targeting only the Islamic State group fighters.
“We have to get a very detailed level of understanding. What is the political objective we’re out to accomplish? Frankly, I don’t know what that is right now,” Mattis said. “The clarity and commitment of the U.S. can draw in the full commitment of others.”
Tentative or halfhearted commitment only drives potential allies further away, he said.
In Afghanistan and elsewhere, Fallon stressed the importance of differentiating between Sunni militants who believe in the cause of extremist groups, and the disaffected local populations who are coerced into joining such networks because they have no other alternative.
Fallon stepped down from his position in 2008 following remarks published in an Esquire article criticizing what he perceived as President George W. Bush administration’s march to war with Iran.
The U.S. should remain in Afghanistan beyond the 2016 deadline imposed by the Obama administration when all U.S. troops will withdraw, he said. Troops could remain in largely a training role, with special operations forces helping the government with the tasks its own military cannot yet perform.
"The Haqqanis have safe havens in the east, embedded there," Keane said, referring to the notoriously brutal Islamic extremist network that was largely able to hide in Pakistan from U.S. strikes during the war. "The Afghan National Security Force does not have the capability to deal with that harsh reality."
But all of these threats represent a lower priority than one originating from within the U.S. government. Across-the-board spending caps known as sequestration remain law in Congress, which has yet to pass a budget deal that would repeal the automatic cuts.
Sequestration is greater than any foreign threat, and without budget predictability, no strategy can be implemented, Mattis said.
by Paul D. Shinkman
U.S. News & World Report
2015 January 27
An absence of clear policies from the White House makes it impossible for the U.S. to achieve any sort of victory in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and elsewhere in the region, according to three former top military officers who oversaw recent wars there.
“[We need to] come out from our reactive crouch and take a firm, strategic stance in defense of our values,” retired Marine Gen. Jim Mattis said to Congress Tuesday morning.
“America needs a refreshed national security strategy,” he added, saying that it must look beyond the string of crisis “currently consuming the executive branch.”
The notoriously blunt combat commander and former head of U.S. Central Command was testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee alongside retired Navy Adm. William Fallon, also a former CentCom chief, and former Army Vice Chief of Staff Gen. John Keane.
They spoke to new members of the Senate, which for the first time includes veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, such as Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, who was on the dais at Tuesday’s hearing.
The three former commanders highlighted what they see as a common problem among top conflicts sucking in U.S. forces deployed abroad, and threats to the American people at home.
The U.S. has been in a “strategy-free” stance in Iraq for some time, and it didn’t begin with the Obama administration, Mattis said. He applauded President Barack Obama for visiting Saudi Arabia this week to reinforce ties with the longtime Middle Eastern ally, and for using U.S. influence to help oust Nouri al-Maliki, the polarizing former Iraqi prime minister.
But many countries in the region, including the Saudis, the United Arab Emirates and Jordan, remain confused about what America hopes to achieve there while stating its goal remains to pivot to the Pacific.
“We’ve disappointed a lot of friends out there, from Abu Dabi to Riyadh, from Tel Aviv to Cairo,” Mattis said.
Keane, a Vietnam veteran, helped oversee the initial invasion of Iraq and became one of the most vocal advocates following his 2003 retirement for increasing the number of troops deployed to the war there. Keane, along with Mattis and Fallon, criticized Obama’s preference for ending wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on a preconceived deadline, instead of weighing progress on the ground, he says.
The U.S. fight against Islamic extremism should resemble something closer to U.S. efforts to contain communist ideology wrought by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, he said Tuesday.
A “policy of disengagement in the Middle East” has contributed to the rise of such extremism, he said, conceding that the appeal of groups like the Islamic State group in Iraq and Syria, or al-Qaida in Pakistan or Yemen, would still exist were it not for U.S. intervention in the region.
The U.S. must focus on gathering allies who share similar values and political beliefs to confront his threat, he said, or it remains doomed to face the same problems again. This is particularly important ahead of the reported massive offensive against the Islamic State group in the key Iraqi city of Mosul and in Anbar province this spring.
“Will there be something after ISIS to deal with?” he said, using a common alternative name for the Islamic State group. “You bet, if we don’t take a comprehensive approach to deal with it.”
Mattis offered a similar example in Syria, saying it remains unclear what the administration hopes to achieve politically in that country.
A civil war between the regime of President Bashar Assad and an opposition movement flared up in early 2011 amid the so-called “Arab Spring.” Extremists from al-Qaida in Iraq crossed the border into the active war zone, where they found safe haven, giving them time to arm, train and supply before launching a new offensive back into Iraq as the Islamic State group.
The Obama administration kept the civil war at arms length, refusing on multiple occasions to openly fund and arm the opposition movement, or to conduct unilateral airstrikes. That changed last summer when the U.S. began a continuing air campaign targeting only the Islamic State group fighters.
“We have to get a very detailed level of understanding. What is the political objective we’re out to accomplish? Frankly, I don’t know what that is right now,” Mattis said. “The clarity and commitment of the U.S. can draw in the full commitment of others.”
Tentative or halfhearted commitment only drives potential allies further away, he said.
In Afghanistan and elsewhere, Fallon stressed the importance of differentiating between Sunni militants who believe in the cause of extremist groups, and the disaffected local populations who are coerced into joining such networks because they have no other alternative.
Fallon stepped down from his position in 2008 following remarks published in an Esquire article criticizing what he perceived as President George W. Bush administration’s march to war with Iran.
The U.S. should remain in Afghanistan beyond the 2016 deadline imposed by the Obama administration when all U.S. troops will withdraw, he said. Troops could remain in largely a training role, with special operations forces helping the government with the tasks its own military cannot yet perform.
"The Haqqanis have safe havens in the east, embedded there," Keane said, referring to the notoriously brutal Islamic extremist network that was largely able to hide in Pakistan from U.S. strikes during the war. "The Afghan National Security Force does not have the capability to deal with that harsh reality."
But all of these threats represent a lower priority than one originating from within the U.S. government. Across-the-board spending caps known as sequestration remain law in Congress, which has yet to pass a budget deal that would repeal the automatic cuts.
Sequestration is greater than any foreign threat, and without budget predictability, no strategy can be implemented, Mattis said.
2015-01-24
How to Deal With U.S. Citizens Who Become Radical Islamic Terrorists
It is inscrutable to all rational thinkers that our elected officials are pathologically incapable of addressing the chronic issue of U.S. citizens traveling to the Middle East, fighting with radical Islamic terrorists against the U.S. and then returning to this country to perpetrate death and destruction across the Nation. The solution is painfully simple — and effective — and applies equally to local self-radicalized Islamic terrorists who spread death and terror across this country.
The United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 23 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death." This is precisely the sort of issue that firing squads are so perfectly designed to deal with and in a fashion that dramatically reduces recidivism. How difficult can it be!
POSTSCRIPT: Nidal Malik Hasan murdered 13 people and injured more than 30 others at Fort Hood, Texas, on November 5, 2009. Today Hasan is alive and well and living off the U.S. taxpayer. On August 28, 2014, his attorney announced that Hasan had written a letter to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — head of the notorious Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which has proclaimed a caliphate in Iraq and Syria and has been designated a terrorist organization by the US, UN, and many Western countries. In the letter, Hasan requests to be made a citizen of the Islamic State and included his signature and the abbreviation SoA (Soldier of Allah). And this is justice in the U.S. today?
The United States Code at 18 U.S.C. § 23 states "whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death." This is precisely the sort of issue that firing squads are so perfectly designed to deal with and in a fashion that dramatically reduces recidivism. How difficult can it be!
POSTSCRIPT: Nidal Malik Hasan murdered 13 people and injured more than 30 others at Fort Hood, Texas, on November 5, 2009. Today Hasan is alive and well and living off the U.S. taxpayer. On August 28, 2014, his attorney announced that Hasan had written a letter to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi — head of the notorious Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which has proclaimed a caliphate in Iraq and Syria and has been designated a terrorist organization by the US, UN, and many Western countries. In the letter, Hasan requests to be made a citizen of the Islamic State and included his signature and the abbreviation SoA (Soldier of Allah). And this is justice in the U.S. today?
2015-01-17
And This Is How The U.S. Fights Radical Islamic Terrorism!
James Taylor Demonstrates U.S. Resolve in the Face of Global Terror
By Allen West — 2015 January 17
There are Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris. There are raids against Islamic terrorists in Belgium. ISIS is expanding its territory. Boko Haram now possesses more territory than ISIS. So how does the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, show American strength, resolve, resilience, and support to the country that sent Marquis de Lafayette and the French Navy during our Revolutionary War — and the gift of the Statue of Liberty? With a big hug and a song!
As reported by The Weekly Standard, “U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visited Paris Friday in what was billed as a show of solidarity with the French people after terrorists attacked last week. The former Massachusetts senator brought fellow Bay Stater and singer-songwriter James Taylor to sing a slightly off-key rendition of “You’ve Got a Friend” to a Parisian audience.”
I am at a loss for words. ISIS is throwing gays from buildings, crucifying thieves, and stoning women. Boko Haram kidnapped young girls and is now using them as suicide bombers. Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is training Islamic jihadists to savagely slaughter cartoonists. And America is releasing Islamic terrorists from GITMO and singing folk songs – acoustic, yet.
What in God’s holy name is happening, ladies and gentlemen? Do you understand what an abject embarrassment we are? What is it about progressive socialists that they believe a kumbaya moment can make all the pain go away?
What the French could use right now is a joint Special Operations raid against an AQAP terrorist training site where if you want to sing a song, how about this one by Drowning Pool, “Let the Bodies Hit The Floor.” Now that’s how you respond — just ask the Belgians! Or how about a little Richard Wagner and the “Ride of the Valkyries” — who could ever forget that scene from “Apocolypse Now?” Oops, that could upset Kerry.
While several world leaders joined a massive march in Paris on Sunday to protest the Islamic terrorist attacks on the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish kosher market, the highest-ranking U.S. official in attendance was the American ambassador to France — whose qualifications were being a big time Obama fundraising bundler. Maybe she’d gone shopping in Paris.
President Obama has been criticized for not going himself or sending Vice President Biden or Secretary Kerry to the event. So how do we make amends? We send James Taylor to serenade the French people — after we couldn’t find the courage to be there last Sunday to march united. But we certainly could have Taylor badly sing a weepy, wimpy song. Ya think it made Islamic jihadists cry? So what's next, maybe we send Oprah Winfrey to Yemen, or even to meet with ISIS, and she can ask them about their childhood and to get in touch with their feelings — you know — empathize with them.
Well, it is Saturday and I leave you at the end of this missive with a piece to calm you — Claude Debussy’s “Claire de Lune.” Thanks to our French brethren for the ideal of Liberty, Montesquieu, Lafayette, and Lady Liberty — I promise you it does get better. It has to get better.
By Allen West — 2015 January 17
There are Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris. There are raids against Islamic terrorists in Belgium. ISIS is expanding its territory. Boko Haram now possesses more territory than ISIS. So how does the U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry, show American strength, resolve, resilience, and support to the country that sent Marquis de Lafayette and the French Navy during our Revolutionary War — and the gift of the Statue of Liberty? With a big hug and a song!
As reported by The Weekly Standard, “U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visited Paris Friday in what was billed as a show of solidarity with the French people after terrorists attacked last week. The former Massachusetts senator brought fellow Bay Stater and singer-songwriter James Taylor to sing a slightly off-key rendition of “You’ve Got a Friend” to a Parisian audience.”
I am at a loss for words. ISIS is throwing gays from buildings, crucifying thieves, and stoning women. Boko Haram kidnapped young girls and is now using them as suicide bombers. Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) is training Islamic jihadists to savagely slaughter cartoonists. And America is releasing Islamic terrorists from GITMO and singing folk songs – acoustic, yet.
What in God’s holy name is happening, ladies and gentlemen? Do you understand what an abject embarrassment we are? What is it about progressive socialists that they believe a kumbaya moment can make all the pain go away?
What the French could use right now is a joint Special Operations raid against an AQAP terrorist training site where if you want to sing a song, how about this one by Drowning Pool, “Let the Bodies Hit The Floor.” Now that’s how you respond — just ask the Belgians! Or how about a little Richard Wagner and the “Ride of the Valkyries” — who could ever forget that scene from “Apocolypse Now?” Oops, that could upset Kerry.
While several world leaders joined a massive march in Paris on Sunday to protest the Islamic terrorist attacks on the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish kosher market, the highest-ranking U.S. official in attendance was the American ambassador to France — whose qualifications were being a big time Obama fundraising bundler. Maybe she’d gone shopping in Paris.
President Obama has been criticized for not going himself or sending Vice President Biden or Secretary Kerry to the event. So how do we make amends? We send James Taylor to serenade the French people — after we couldn’t find the courage to be there last Sunday to march united. But we certainly could have Taylor badly sing a weepy, wimpy song. Ya think it made Islamic jihadists cry? So what's next, maybe we send Oprah Winfrey to Yemen, or even to meet with ISIS, and she can ask them about their childhood and to get in touch with their feelings — you know — empathize with them.
Well, it is Saturday and I leave you at the end of this missive with a piece to calm you — Claude Debussy’s “Claire de Lune.” Thanks to our French brethren for the ideal of Liberty, Montesquieu, Lafayette, and Lady Liberty — I promise you it does get better. It has to get better.
2014-12-18
Obama Gives the Castro Regime in Cuba an Undeserved Bailout
By Editorial Board
2014 December 17
Washington Post
IN RECENT months, the outlook for the Castro regime in Cuba was growing steadily darker. The modest reforms it adopted in recent years to improve abysmal economic conditions had stalled, due to the regime’s refusal to allow Cubans greater freedoms. Worse, the accelerating economic collapse of Venezuela meant that the huge subsidies that have kept the Castros afloat for the past decade were in peril. A growing number of Cubans were demanding basic human rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly.
On Wednesday, the Castros suddenly obtained a comprehensive bailout — from the Obama administration. President Obama granted the regime everything on its wish list that was within his power to grant; a full lifting of the trade embargo requires congressional action. Full diplomatic relations will be established, Cuba’s place on the list of terrorism sponsors reviewed and restrictions lifted on U.S. investment and most travel to Cuba. That liberalization will provide Havana with a fresh source of desperately needed hard currency and eliminate U.S. leverage for political reforms.
As part of the bargain, Havana released Alan Gross, a U.S. Agency for International Development contractor who was unjustly imprisoned five years ago for trying to help Cuban Jews. Also freed was an unidentified U.S. intelligence agent in Cuba — as were three Cuban spies who had been convicted of operations in Florida that led to Cuba’s 1996 shootdown of a plane carrying anti-Castro activists. While Mr. Obama sought to portray Mr. Gross’s release as unrelated to the spy swap, there can be no question that Cuba’s hard-line intelligence apparatus obtained exactly what it sought when it made Mr. Gross a de facto hostage.
No wonder Yoani Sánchez, Cuba’s leading dissident blogger, concluded Wednesday that “Castroism has won” and predicted that for weeks Cubans will have to endure proclamations by the government that it is the “winner of its ultimate battle.”
During his announcement on Wednesday, President Obama said a transformation of relations with Cuba would bring opportunities for both countries.
Mr. Obama argued that his sweeping change of policy was overdue because the strategy of isolating the Communist regime “has had little effect.” In fact, Cuba has been marginalized in the Americas for decades, and the regime has been deprived of financial resources it could have used to spread its malignant influence in the region, as Venezuela has done. That the embargo has not succeeded in destroying communism does not explain why all sanctions should be lifted without any meaningful political concessions by Cuba.
U.S. officials said the regime agreed to release 53 political prisoners and allow more access to the Internet. But Raúl Castro promised four years ago to release all political prisoners, so the White House has purchased the same horse already sold to the Vatican and Spain.
The administration says its move will transform relations with Latin America, but that is naive. Countries that previously demanded an end to U.S. sanctions on Cuba will not now look to Havana for reforms; instead, they will press the Obama administration not to sanction Venezuela. Mr. Obama says normalizing relations will allow the United States to be more effective in promoting political change in Cuba. That is contrary to U.S. experience with Communist regimes such as Vietnam, where normalization has led to no improvements on human rights in two decades. Moreover, nothing in Mr. Obama’s record of lukewarm and inconstant support for democratic change across the globe can give Ms. Sánchez and her fellow freedom fighters confidence in this promise.
The Vietnam outcome is what the Castros are counting on: a flood of U.S. tourists and business investment that will allow the regime to maintain its totalitarian system indefinitely. Mr. Obama may claim that he has dismantled a 50-year-old failed policy; what he has really done is give a 50-year-old failed regime a new lease on life.
2014 December 17
Washington Post
IN RECENT months, the outlook for the Castro regime in Cuba was growing steadily darker. The modest reforms it adopted in recent years to improve abysmal economic conditions had stalled, due to the regime’s refusal to allow Cubans greater freedoms. Worse, the accelerating economic collapse of Venezuela meant that the huge subsidies that have kept the Castros afloat for the past decade were in peril. A growing number of Cubans were demanding basic human rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly.
On Wednesday, the Castros suddenly obtained a comprehensive bailout — from the Obama administration. President Obama granted the regime everything on its wish list that was within his power to grant; a full lifting of the trade embargo requires congressional action. Full diplomatic relations will be established, Cuba’s place on the list of terrorism sponsors reviewed and restrictions lifted on U.S. investment and most travel to Cuba. That liberalization will provide Havana with a fresh source of desperately needed hard currency and eliminate U.S. leverage for political reforms.
As part of the bargain, Havana released Alan Gross, a U.S. Agency for International Development contractor who was unjustly imprisoned five years ago for trying to help Cuban Jews. Also freed was an unidentified U.S. intelligence agent in Cuba — as were three Cuban spies who had been convicted of operations in Florida that led to Cuba’s 1996 shootdown of a plane carrying anti-Castro activists. While Mr. Obama sought to portray Mr. Gross’s release as unrelated to the spy swap, there can be no question that Cuba’s hard-line intelligence apparatus obtained exactly what it sought when it made Mr. Gross a de facto hostage.
No wonder Yoani Sánchez, Cuba’s leading dissident blogger, concluded Wednesday that “Castroism has won” and predicted that for weeks Cubans will have to endure proclamations by the government that it is the “winner of its ultimate battle.”
During his announcement on Wednesday, President Obama said a transformation of relations with Cuba would bring opportunities for both countries.
Mr. Obama argued that his sweeping change of policy was overdue because the strategy of isolating the Communist regime “has had little effect.” In fact, Cuba has been marginalized in the Americas for decades, and the regime has been deprived of financial resources it could have used to spread its malignant influence in the region, as Venezuela has done. That the embargo has not succeeded in destroying communism does not explain why all sanctions should be lifted without any meaningful political concessions by Cuba.
U.S. officials said the regime agreed to release 53 political prisoners and allow more access to the Internet. But Raúl Castro promised four years ago to release all political prisoners, so the White House has purchased the same horse already sold to the Vatican and Spain.
The administration says its move will transform relations with Latin America, but that is naive. Countries that previously demanded an end to U.S. sanctions on Cuba will not now look to Havana for reforms; instead, they will press the Obama administration not to sanction Venezuela. Mr. Obama says normalizing relations will allow the United States to be more effective in promoting political change in Cuba. That is contrary to U.S. experience with Communist regimes such as Vietnam, where normalization has led to no improvements on human rights in two decades. Moreover, nothing in Mr. Obama’s record of lukewarm and inconstant support for democratic change across the globe can give Ms. Sánchez and her fellow freedom fighters confidence in this promise.
The Vietnam outcome is what the Castros are counting on: a flood of U.S. tourists and business investment that will allow the regime to maintain its totalitarian system indefinitely. Mr. Obama may claim that he has dismantled a 50-year-old failed policy; what he has really done is give a 50-year-old failed regime a new lease on life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)