Cuba attempts to "shame" Canada

Article: Cuba Joins Iran to Shame Canada at UN
By: Stephen Edwards
Published: November 24, 2006.

We were talking in class about how part of the purpose of human rights discourse was to put into words violations that are thought to be universal. Part of the use of the discourse is to work as sort of a framework to measure entities and nations, and hence be able to “shame” them into curbing perceived human rights violations.

Well, its looks like Canada is being shamed from one its Latin American friends, Cuba. According to the article, Cuba has joined Iran in shaming Canada for its treatment of aboriginals. As the author points out: “Human rights resolutions at the world body are meant to ''name-and-shame'' countries that abuse their citizens, but whether they pass, they often reveal allegiances on the international stage.”

This topic was brought up in class, as some students pointed out that countries will only pursue criticism where there can be some reciprocal benefit, as was the case of the fumbling around between the U.S. and Britain in the Arbenz debacle. Regarding the case in today's article, it is quite obvious Cuba is making a move to get closer to Iran, perhaps with the idea that there is more to gain with the “guateconería” with Iran than Canada.

I am going to take the opportunity to deflect the argument here. Though I do acknowledge there is much work to do with aboriginal rights and relations in this country, I am going to change the subject. Deflecting the argument is usually a Cuban tactic to ignore accusations of human rights abuses. For example, if a Cuban official is confronted with a question about the lack of democracy within Cuba, the subject will be changed to the flaws in the U.S. system, and dictatorships the U.S. has supported in the past. Point taken, but conveniently the question about Cuba is never answered. It never has been, and it never will. Unless, of course, Cuba does actually become a democracy.

This is an astounding, if not strange, case of hypocrisy from Cuba, given the unexpected shot at Canada - - a country that has repeatedly voted against the U.S. embargo, historically maintained strong diplomatic ties, and allowed millions of vacations (not hyperbole here) from its citizens at a time that Cuba has badly needed the tourist dollars. I feel that many Canadians have been soft with Cuba, as you may have read with one example I pointed out in October. There seems to be too much focus on the embargo, imperialism, and the “5 Heroes” case, rather than defending the rights of the ordinary Cuban in relation with their own government. I don’t have time to make an extensive list, but I’ll briefly mention some violations in Cuba that will make the hypocrisy of Cuba’s decision quite clear.

1. Cuba is not democratic. There may be some democracy at some local levels, but nationally Cuba is a dictatorship. There are no opposing parties, no opposing platforms, no alternative viewpoints objectively reported in the media. The results of the opposition performance in elections is not reported because there is no opposition.

2. Media: controlled by the state. There is virtually no criticism or freedom of expression published in the national newspapers or on television - - both of which are state controlled.

3. Cubans have little right to earn a living. All business is controlled by the state. To operate any business, you must seek approval from the government. Private salsa lessons? Illegal. Spanish tutor? Only with permission. Everything is controlled, up to washing clothes for tourists. Many people do get away with private business, since the informal economy has penetrated every segment of society. However, ultimately the government controls it, and people are under constant threat of paying fines, confiscations of property, or jail time for “offences.” There have been period crackdowns, and many people have paid a price for simply earning a very modest living by our standards. Even countries with worse human rights records than Cuba generally manage to leave people alone that can scrape out their own living.

4. Freedom of movement: Cubans need permission to enter or leave their country. There are also restrictions of movement within the country. For example, “The Ladies in White,” a group of wives that are protesting the political imprisonment of their husbands, won the Sakharov Prize in Europe for freedom of thought. The Cuban government refused them the exit visas.

5. Freedom of association: communication between Cubans and foreigners is restricted. Cubans can be arbitrarily arrested for suspicion of prostitution or a number of supposed offences connected with associating with foreigners. Cubans are often faced with harassment from the police while with tourists, for example their ID is checked and their name run through the radio. No provocation is needed other than “suspicion.” To understand the scope of this harrassment, a friend was stopped while walking with me one time. Who's my friend? He is a classically trained musician, speaks 4 languages, and his father is a composer who works with some of the many legends of Cuban music. In Cuba it does not matter. Anyone can be harrassed.

Anyways, the list could go on. These violations I’ve talked about have nothing to do with “imperialism” or Bush. This is all Cuba’s own doing. All of these rights being violated are outlined in the U.N. declaration. I want to reiterate that I think native rights are an important issue in Canada. However, I justify deflecting the argument in this case because the hypocrisy is on such a grand scale that I feel it merits no other response.



tag: last301

A Couple of Articles on Guatemala

Article: The Search for Guatemala's Dead
Posted: November 8, 2006

This article summarizes the efforts and impediments of indigenous people in Guatemala trying to recover the remains of loved ones who were victims of the civil war. It is a good summary of the projected figures of the victims of the war, along with numbers that have been recovered to date, as well as a general overview of the scope and nature of the violence. The article was written in Nebaj, which is a region that is discussed in the next class reading. What I’d like to briefly talk about is one paragraph. It points out how international help has helped the exhumation of victims:

“But thanks in part to an infusion of foreign funds, private forensic teams and grass-roots organizations dedicated to helping indigenous peoples have expanded their efforts to file claims with the state to authorize exhumations.”

We were talking in class how rights discourse can help people who were violated. This case shows that at least some impact can be made. International organizations have funded and promoted the rights of people to exhume their loved ones, a right that, as the article mentions, people have been killed trying to lobby for. Though it is not outright justice for those responsible, it can perhaps be the start of the process. The article mentions that so far only two Guatemalan officers have been convicted for crimes during the war. I think this might be the beginning of justice. The next article mentions some new cases against impunity.


Article: Guatemala: ordenan captura de militares
Published: November 7, 2006

I’m sorry that I could only find it the article in Spanish. Often BBC neglects putting some of the better Latin American articles on their English site. This article directly relates to what we were talking about in class - - how to administer justice for past crimes. Apparently Spain has asked for extradition of 4 retired military officers and 2 civilians who are accused of being involved with the Spanish embassy fire in Guatemala City in 1980. The Guatemalan justice department has complied. Rigoberta Menchú’s father was one of the victims in the blaze. Spain also asked for the extradition of ex-general Efraín Ríos Montt, but judges refused due to insufficient evidence. The article shows, again, that international influence does have an impact.



tag: last301

Kate Moss, Cocaine and Colombia

In a Reuters article this week it was reported that Colombian vice president Franscisco Santos points to people like Kate Moss for the Colombian cocaine problem. According to him, it is people like Moss that glorify the use of cocaine. After the fact of getting busted for use, it appears that Moss has still managed to get lucrative contracts. The vice president feels that she's been let off quite easy. He also points out that, "Every gram of coke that is consumed is soaked in Colombian blood." I don't think Moss in the only user, and the article implies that the vice president wasn't trying to lay undue blame Moss, just citing her for an example of users that don't pay a price.

I think that the vice president makes a good point. The users as a whole drive the market for the drug. There is still an abundance in society, and I'll cite the example of my home town, Nanaimo, where the price per gram is roughly $45. This contradicts people like U.S. drug czar John Walters claiming the drug war is being won, and citing high street prices as success. Not so. There is still an abundance. Perhaps some regions or cities have made strides in control, but in society overall it is still flowing in.

Back to Santos' point, the problem is the demand, not necessarily the supply. This contradicts the expensive US effort of supply-side control, which isn't cost effective, or working. I'm not sure many users are acutely aware of the problems that cocaine has contributed to in regard to the country's history of violence. But I think that Santos makes a good point that people should think about the consequences for Colombia by taking the drug - - a different angle than focusing on the legality and health issues.

Source:
http://www.alertnet.org/db/blogs/1265/2006/10/3-150949-1.htm

tag: last301

'Dirty War' witnesses fear testifying

Julio Jorge López

The Miami Herald published an article this week focusing on the continuing legacy of the dictatorship from Argentina’s “Dirty War.” A few students posted articles a few weeks ago about a Dirty War trial witness, Julio Jorge López, who “disappeared” after being a key witness in the prosecution of former Buenos Aires province police chief Miguel Osvaldo Etchecolatz. Rogue members of the Buenos Aires police force with ties to the military dictatorship are suspected in the disappearance.

López is still missing, and this is having an effect on witnesses set to give testimony in the ongoing trials and former military and police officers accused of crimes. María Laura Bretal is one such witness: ''I am not ready to let the police or the military follow me around. Look what happened the last time they were protecting us.” Another torture victim, Patricia Chabat, talks about what the López disappearance signifies: ''They know very well the message they want to send us. I don't think we will ever find him dead or alive. López is a symbol.”

The article outlines the scope of the upcoming trials. Approximately 1000 witnesses are ready to testify in the roughly 900 trials that are scheduled against members of the 1970s security forces. The article mentions that after López disappeared, “death threats started raining on judges, prosecutors, witnesses and human rights activists.”

In reaction to the recent threats, Kirchner has reintroduced a bill that would extend witness protection services. Currently there are 20 Argentineans under witness protection.
The legacy of terror has had a deep impact on the witnesses. Many still have a mistrust for the security forces, even those that are protecting them in the trials.

Amnesty

The article talks about one of the negative aspects for the movement to end amnestity - - the emergence of groups that actually support it. Three weeks ago there was a protest of 5000 people who were demanding amnesty for the forces on the grounds that most of the disappeared were leftist guerrillas who killed innocent civilians. In another article, I read one of the opinions of a protestor who felt that the torture was necessary to battle the leftist threat - - “terrorism vs. terrorism.” This is an awful case of double morality. If a person is against the insurgents because they are supposedly terrorists, how can you call your side the good side if you use terrorist tactics yourself? I know my opinion seems obvious to the class, but people still quite animately have the “they do it, why can’t we” attitude, as seen with the recent protest . You hear the justifications for torture in the War on Terror, and many people defend Pinochet and Reagan’s in this exact way. These views are not isolated, unfortunately.

Source: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breaking_news/15819906.htm?source=rss&channel=miamiherald_breaking_news


tag: last301

Freedom of Movement for Cubans - A Privilege, Not a Right

"I am not asking the Cuban government to let me enter the country," Valle said. "I am demanding my right to enter and leave when I decide and am in condition to do so — just like any other citizen of the world."

Amir Valle is a Cuban writer who has been in Europe promoting his book, “Jineteras.” When Cubans receive an exit permit, the government usually restricts the amount of time on which the person can be away. When Cubans remain abroad past the due date, they must get the visa renewed to reenter Cuba. Sometimes the person is denied reentry. Other times, Cubans choose to “stay” in the particular country permanently, which in the Cuban vernacular means “defect.” Amir decided to stay longer in Europe because he was enjoying the tour and was receiving invites to more functions. But he was not planning to “stay” in the traditional sense. He wants to go back to Cuba, but the government is taking its time on the decision to allow him back in. “Many Cuban intellectuals have spent years asking for this absurd regulation for entering and departing the country to be annulled,” Valle wrote from Berlin. “We have not received any answer, except for the classic, 'It's under discussion.’” Yahoo News covers the story here.

Freedom of movement within and outside a country is a basic human right. Amir is simply demanding this right. It should not Cuba’s decision on how long Amir may visit Europe. The decision should be up to Amir and the opportunities he has abroad. This story is a clear example of how the Cuban government turns what should be a basic right into a privilege - - one that is arbitrarily judged by the regime.

Apparently Amir has also been criticizing the Cuban government in some interviews. His book “Jineteras” is about true stories of the black market and prostitution in Cuba, which undoubtedly is a thorn in the side for a government who relies heavily on propaganda. Because of this, it appears the government may be reacting to Amir exercising another basic right - - free speech. Amir seems to be a peaceful man, and he’s won literary awards within and outside Cuba. This story demonstrates how the government has little tolerance for dissent, and the various methods it uses to inhibit it.


Source:
Snow, Anita. "Cuban Writer Can't Return, Won't Defect." Yahoo News. Oct 20, 2006.

tag: last301

Refreshing Attitude from Ecuadorian Presidential Candidate

The national elections in Ecuador are going to a run-off in November between Alvaro Noboa, and a leftist candidate, Rafael Correa. In many Latin American elections there have been concerns over countries backing the presidential candidates of others. For example, Chavez publicly backing Ortega for the upcoming elections in Nicaragua, and going as far as dangling a carrot by suggesting that if Ortega wins they can look forward to signing oil deals. Another example is the tough time US embassies have in refraining from publicly announcing which candidate the US prefers, as well as proof of actually funding certain parties.

In a story today on the Globovision (Venezuela) website, leftist candidate Correa made an excellent point that foreign governments should not "entremeterse" in other countries elections. His example - - Hugo Chavez. Even though Correa is leftest (similar to Chavez, but I don't know to what extent), he threatened to end his friendship with Chavez if he meddles in the upcoming elections. He prefers to win with integrity, rather than through the propaganda and financial battle of outside parties looking for alliances. Perhaps the comments are a strategy on Correa's part, but to his credit it shows integrity to criticize potential friends, rather than remain silent on the issue.

Sovereignty is imperative for elections, and democratic rights should not be compromised for the gain of outside interests.

tag: last301

School of Americas and Human Rights: Defense and Critique

The former U.S. Army School of the Americas, now called the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHISC) has been a controversial arm of U.S. foreign policy. It was founded in Panama in 1946 to provide American training to Latin America soldiers from nations that are friendly to the U.S. Today, the principal location is at Fort Benning, Georgia. Soldiers from several Latin American countries travel there to receive both combat and classroom training, including courses on human rights. However, there has been strong criticism over time that the institution has contributed to, and perhaps worsened, what is perceived to be by many a poor military human rights record in Latin America.

The article “Human Rights Instruction at the U.S. Army School of the Americas” is a defense of the WHISC and its human rights program, as well as an attempt to demonstrate that the media has given the Latin American armed forces a worse human rights reputation than it has deserved. The article is primarily written by Dr. Russell W. Ramsay, with contributions from Major Antonio Raimondo. Dr. Ramsay is a distinguished resident professor from the WHISC who lectures in Spanish on strategy at the Inter-American Defense College at Fort McNair, Washington, D.C. Though Dr. Ramsay makes some valid points about the possibility of bias against the WHISC and its direct causal relation to some atrocities, his overall defense of the institution’s human rights program and the Latin American armed forces is flawed.

One of the key themes of Dr. Ramsay’s essay is that the Latin American armed forces are not as bad as the mainstream media presents them. One reason given is domestic approval within Latin America. According to him, polls taken at 10 year intervals since 1830 would surprise academic analysts of the region about the amount of positive response the defense and law enforcement would get from the public (Raimondo 96). He claims, of course, that reformist and leftist elements would report hatred of the armed forces, but the majority of the citizenry would not (Raimondo 97). This is a terrible analysis for two reasons. One, obviously, is that he himself admits that it is speculation: “The results of an honest public opinion poll…would surprise most U.S. academics” (Raimondo 97). “Would” surprise academics - - only if someone had taken them. It is a wonder why he would even include this in an article that appears to be an academic response to a serious topic. The other reason is that human rights violations are not taken into consideration in the poll. Even if such polls were taken, it would not justify the abuses of the minorities and political opposition that he himself admits may have been omitted. His analysis can be construed as an excuse for violations because the majority was content with what were, in most of the Latin American cases, counterinsurgency wars. By mentioning that the leftists and reformists “would” hate the armed forces exposes his own bias against these groups. There is no elaboration on whether these people deserve the same rights as other groups.

An important technique used to defend the Latin American armed forces is comparative analysis. In the poll example above, if taken, would have been compared to polls from the other regions: “But if such polls had been taken and compared with similar polls taken in Africa, Asia, the Middle East, eastern and even central Europe, the Latin American armed forces would rank surprisingly high as defenders of human rights in public estimation” (Raimondo 97). To make an effective comparative analysis, a comparison should be done with regions known to have a good record. Even if the polls were taken, and the author proven to be correct, that would only mean Latin America is “not as bad” as some regions. This argument would be more effective using a comparison with countries like Canada or Great Britain - - countries who’s records are considerably better than countries in Africa or the Middle East.

In another comparison with other regions is, the amount of wars in Latin America since 1830 and the limited military budgets are used. There have only been two major international wars in each of the 19th and 20th centuries. The region has also been the only to limit its military expenditures to roughly two percent during this period (Raimondo 101). However, what these facts do not take into account is that most Latin nations have had a traditionally weak state, accounting for the lack of total international war as well as high expenditures. The result is, as became particularly evident in the second half of the 20th century, that the weak state, coupled with chronic disparity of wealth, has led to internal, limited conflict as opposed to international “total” war (Centeno 17). Internal conflict has led to numerous civilian abuses by state power, since counterinsurgency wars are basically wars against certain populations within a state, and not external powers. Opposing lines are hard to draw, and liberties are taken by the state to “err on the side of caution,” such as what happened in El Salvador and Argentina.

To further the argument that Latin America has seen less violence, the author states that the region has the: “Lowest deaths, percentage of deaths of any major world region. No toxic gas stocks or nuclear weapons.” Given these facts, the author questions, “why so much academic ink is employed on the generic vilification of the Latin American armed forces, when the same forces in other world regions are worse on all accounts?” (Raimondo 101). These facts do not reflect the effects of internal war. The effects of terror and human rights violations on the population in these types of conflicts are wide spread. The numbers do not have to be high to be effective, and the methods used do not have to be chemical or nuclear. Torture, mutilation, summary executions, and disappearances, have been common techniques for Latin American forces, regardless of their comparison to other regions. These methods are not expensive and perhaps do not have the same body counts as, international wars, but they do inflict significant physical and psychological damage on the population.

Oliver Cromwell’s “Black Legend” is referenced to present five explanations why the poor human rights record in Latin America is exaggerated. First, there is an implication that scholars are racist in their implication of the Latin American soldier’s love of violence and contempt for the citizen. According to Dr. Ramsay, this region has the “lowest record of military human rights violations” (Raimondo 103). However, there is no data or reference to back this statement. Second, there is an accusation that there is a liberal bias in U.S. Latin American scholars. This may be true, but there is no measure for this bias. There is no data to defend the record of the Latin American armed forces. Hence, the bias cannot be put in perspective. The third point the author makes is that Latin American armies have been submitted to close scrutiny in their budgets, arms and troop strengths to a much better degree than other developing regions. This point has little to due with human rights since armed forces for the most part do not go out of the way to keep immaculate records of their own abuses. Budgets and inventories are irrelevant in this respect. Another problem with this is that the author is again making the comparison to developing regions who may not have good records either. The author is implying that somehow armed forces are not subject to the same human rights scrutiny in poor nations as they are in the wealthier ones. Fourth, a myth has been created by the Cuban government and Andean drug traffickers during the Cold War to discredit the opposing armed forces. There definitely has been a propaganda campaign, and Cuba has continued with this post-Cold War. However, there are no specific examples of “faked massacres,” and trumped up witnesses. The statement “it is now virtually impossible to sort out truth from fantasy, especially in the academic literature” amounts to only hyperbole. The final reason the author feels the “Black Legend” has been a disservice to the armed forces is that the U.S. news media has been selective and sensationalistic in its coverage of Latin America armed forces abuses (Raimondo 103). There may be some merit to this, however it does not address the problem of the high number of existing, documented violations, only to defend them as “exaggerated.” There is no example given here to elaborate on the theory, however there is an example in another section that is relevant. In the well publicized incident in El Salvador where six Jesuit priests were murdered during the conflict of the early 80s, it is largely unknown that School of the Americas graduates from the Salvadorian army were the ones who risked their lives and blew the whistle on the ones who were guilty of the massacre (Raimondo 106). So in a sense, there is some bias in the reporting. However, this is only a footnote in what is a long list of massacres, violations, and abuses documented by several Latin American armies with graduates from the WHISC.

The author, with all these concepts, is trying to defend the Latin American armed forces because the WHISC has trained many soldiers that have gone on to commit human rights violations, as well as soldiers that became dictators, such as Efraín Rios Montt. One of the defenses of the WHISC regarding the relationship between its human rights training and the perception that its students are not adhering is the distinction between cognitive and affective education (Raimondo 106-107). With cognitive education, such as how to clean a gun, the results of the teaching can be measured objectively. Affective education, such as how much human rights ideology sinks in, cannot. Thus, the author implies that the WHISC is doing what it can to teach human rights, but the fact that graduates are not adhering to the teaching does not make the school responsible. I would agree that there is limited truth to this. However, this opens up a complex issue of culpability. A much deeper analysis is needed to explore the effectiveness of the program. If there have and continue to be a number of problems with graduates, is it logical to still operate the program? At some point the school has to take responsibility.

To conclude the article there is an elaborate description of the schools Human Rights Curriculum in the1990s. Details are given about three components: Ethical Foundations; Legal Considerations; and Operational Imperatives (Raimondo 109). The soldiers must also adhere to a Code of Ethics that is punishable when violated (Raimondo 110). To further the ethical foundation there is a class on Just War Doctrine (Jus ad Bellum), as well as legal considerations (Jus in Bello) (Raimondo 110). Women and gay rights, as well as the Pinochet case study (Raimondo 111) are all part of the curriculum. The program, in theory, seems fairly extensive and inclusive. What becomes problematic is that there is evidence that has surfaced about torture manuals being assembled and used for courses both at the WHISC and for field training within Latin America (“Prisoner Abuse”). It is perplexing why this was not mentioned since the article was written after the evidence surfaced. Perhaps there has been reforms by the date of the article, but the omission of the controversy from this article that attempts to provide a defense of the school’s human rights record can only be perceived as deliberate. Thus, the credibility of the argument must further be questioned.

In conclusion, this article does a poor job of defending the WHISC. Comparative analysis is flawed by setting low expectations, and most of the opinions are not backed with data or clear examples. In addition, there is a tone of anti-Communist bias (“neo-Marxist” is used a number of times to describe intellectuals or opposition), along with ethnocentric sentiments, such as the idea that the school provides “courses in Spanish that would otherwise only reach out to English-speaking personal” (Raimondo 92).



tag: last301

Criticism of the Vancouver Communities in Solidarity with Cuba

The VCSC (Vancouver Communities in Solidarity with Cuba) is a local, non-profit organization “fighting in defense of Cuba.” As you may recall, someone visited our class a few weeks ago to inform us of the Cuba, Venezuela & Bolivia Solidarity Conference that was going to be held Sept. 30. According to their website, the organization is endorsed by (among others) the Latin American Studies Program from UBC.

I’d like to focus on the problematic VCSC mission statement. The organization claims to be fighting in “defense of Cuba.” They also claim to support “actions in support of Cuba’s sovereignty.” These points are where the problem lies. There is a complete lack of defense from the VCSC of the Cuban citizens individual right to choose the direction of said sovereignty. There are no free elections in Cuba. You will not see election results, you will not see the breakdown of candidates, and you will never see an article in Cuban media about opposition to Castro (unless it is to accuse somebody of “subversion” or “collaborating with the US”). It is a dictatorship. Cubans, as the VCSC implies, deserve the right to self determination. I agree. However, this also means internal self-determination, not just against foreign aggression.

There is often defense of the Revolution by citing health statistics and education. Cuba fairs much better than most third world countries in this regard. They also have strong cultural institutions, as well as a low level of violent crime, compared even to many countries with a wealthier population. However, in the fight for human rights, all citizens should be fought for. Segments of the population, such as political opposition, should not be oppressed just because there are more doctors per capita in Cuba than Peru. This is a weak justification. Could this not be achieved democratically? Also, people are restricted on movement within and outside Cuba. I enjoyed watching Yuniesky Betancourt play shortstop for the Mariners this season. He had to pay smugglers to leave Cuba because athletes are one of the many segments of Cuban society that are tightly restricted in their freedom of movement.

Another problem I’d like to point out from the VCSC’s approach is that the organization hosted a talk by Cuban ambassador Ernesto Santi in March. And at the most recent conference, consul general Laureano Cardoso was invited. The October 3 edition of the Ubyssey covered the recent talk by Cardoso. According to the paper, Cardoso dispelled “various myths perpetuated by the mainstream media” about the Revolution. The paper also says that Cardoso discussed the government structure of Cuba. You can be sure he didn’t elaborate on the elections too much. The point here is that the speakers do not represent the Cuban people. They are propaganda arms for a dictatorship, no matter how “mild” the dictatorship may be. In another example, I happened to catch ambassador Santi on local cable in the summer stating that the Cuban elections were (paraphrasing here), “freer than the American elections.” That is a pretty profound statement for someone representing a government that presently has 71 political prisoners in jail. You can read Amnesty International’s Report on Cuba about that and some of the other HR violations. These spokespersons have absolutely no right to speak on the peoples behalf.

Cuba deserves democracy. I don’t think it is fair to impose a system on the population from the outside. Siding with the Cuban government without the peoples consent does such a thing. Perhaps with elections Cubans would choose to stay the course. That is their decision to make, not ours. What I do know is that many Cubans want change. Some want more freedom to earn a little more money in private business (no third world country restricts the informal market like the Cuban government). Others are completely disillusioned with the system. These people deserve a platform for expression.

In sum, I respect many things the Revolution has accomplished. I respect that the VCSC is trying to support what they believe in and it is their right to lobby for what have been real gains of the Revolution. However, given the lack of democracy and numerous human rights violations in Cuba, in no way should the problems be ignored to support the gains.



tag: last301

Update on Last Week's "Dirty War" Trial Article

A new development has been reported today by BBC regarding the trial of Miguel Etchecolatz. Apparantly one of the witnesses, Jorge Julio Lopez, 77, went missing one day before the conviction last week of Etchecolatz. Buenos Aires provincial minister of government commented on Identidad radio, "Everything makes us believe his disappearance had something to do with [the trial]."

Though at this time there is no conclusion to Lopez's whereabouts, this could end up be a strong reminder that the repressive workings and ideology of a dictatorship still have a lingering affect on Argentine society. Though "El Proceso" ending 23 years ago, there are still supporters of that regime that are very much still young and able to actively take part in human rights violations -- such as the popular method of "disappearing" people.


last301

Argentine Investigator from "Dirty War" Gets Life

Miguel Osvaldo Etchecolatz, 77,Another person associated with "El Proceso" in Argentina during the so-called "Dirty War" was convicted this week. He was convicted for involvement for the disappearance of six people. You can read the details from Yahoo News. I don't mean to sound harsh, but I can't say I sympathize with Etchecolatz when he comments, "They are going to convict me...They have no shame condemning an old, ailing man." This is the second case of person being convicted in Argentina after impunity laws from the 1980s were anulled in 2005.


tag: last301

Castro Singing

As many probably know, Fidel Castro fell ill with a gatro-intestinal disease this summer. Many people felt he had actually died, and that the government was covering up his death. Well, according to Hugo Chavez, Castro is "singing, fit for baseball." Anyhow, I kinda liked this pic since I saw the original movie years ago.

Reading Response - Dave - Sept. 17

Some points:

1776 US Declaration of Independence: The anti-England language sounds like rhetoric, if not propaganda. In the Hamilton and Jay critique of this declaration there is commentary on p.112 that some of the laws that men were being arrested for were arbitrary violations and were “breaches of no said law.” This reflects many of the students comments about many of the declarations of the various constitutions we are reading about how vague the language is. The authors of this article seem to also critique that those in power are adhering to their own interpretations of law and rights. I was also quite impressed to see the writers concerned about the need for more, and clear language about the freedom of press.

Amendment III, U.S. Constitution: “No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner.” I noticed in one of the other declarations something about soldiers being quartered and misread it as the other quartered – all four limbs being tied to a horse. Makes more sense now. It looks like in the 17th century soldiers were perhaps abusing authority, or were given lots of authority over citizens to a point where citizens were regularly taken advantage of.

In the French constitution (p. 118, Human Rights reader), part 1: “social distinction may be based only upon general usefulness.” Not sure exactly what that means, but it sounds like a huge loophole for dignitaries.

One of the parallels I noticed with many of these declarations is the “innocent until proven guilty” concept. Vague concepts of “born free” and “right to happiness” seem to be included.

Article 22, UN Declaration of Human Rights (regarding right to social security) seems to me to quite absent in many regions of Latin America (maybe a bit of an understatement?)

Overall, my feelings reflect some of the comments that have come in and what was mentioned in class. Though there are many good ideas in many of the declarations through the various regions and historic periods, much of the language can be vague and arbitrary. Serious issues, such as genocide, should be taken more serious. I’m a former accounting student, and I can tell you the text for the Canadian Tax course is as thorough and challenging as anything I’ve studied at UBC. Perhaps we don’t have the fine print of the UN declaration for genocide in our courseware, but I sure hope it exists and is as meticulous as the tax guide. Obviously there are problems with the actual effectiveness of the UN. I don’t know a lot of fine details about the organization, so I won’t go on a rant. But situations like Darfur seem to be a pretty good litmus test.


tag: last301

Impunity Controversey in Uruguay

This week in Uruguay the debate about impunity was prominent. What happened is that some former members of the junta militar from 1973-1985 were convicted of crimes that they were previously given amnesty. You can read the BBC Mundo story about it here (sorry, but I couldn't find the article in English).

I find the topic complex because on the one hand I feel people quilty of past crimes should have to pay for them. On the other hand, countries have moved towards democracy (such as Uruguay), and often deals have been made for amnesty for the culpables as part of the package to move towards said democracy. If the deals aren't honored, then future deals would be unlikely if unfortunately dictatorial elements were to take over. With the current leftist movements in Latin America, a right-leaning backlash isn't entirely ridiculous.

Cuban Exile Bombing Suspect Could Be Set Free

One strong area of interest for me is Cuba. So to kick off this blog I'm posting an article about Luis Posada Carriles. He's a Cuban exile suspected in a string of bombings of Cuban hotels, as well as much controversey regarding his involvement in the bombing of a Cubana airlines flight in 1973. You can find a BBC overview of Posada here.

Last year he was apprehended in the US for illegal entry, and was supposed to be deported. He may be set free now because a country has not been found that will accept him from the US, and the courts have ruled that he can't be held indefinitely. Here is the BBC update on the story.

This has been a political "hot pototoe" for the US government since many people consider Posada a terrorist. Despite that, defense from some Cuban exiles can be found for him in Republican-friendly south Florida.

Conclusion: Keep Posada locked up if no country accepts him. He likely won't get a fair trial in Cuba or Venezuela, and given the timing of the decision (five year anniversary of 9/11), people like him should not be set free. Whatever law could potentially set him free should be amended.