NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/9249

Text File | 1992-12-12 | 9.4 KB | 213 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!rich
From: [e-mail] (Rich Winkel)
Subject: Cuban Win at UN; Embargo Weakens
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: PACH
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 05:04:48 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 198

/** reg.cuba: 279.0 **/
** Topic: Cuban Win at UN; Embargo Weakens **
** Written  7:28 pm  Dec  9, 1992 by ttomasko in cdp:reg.cuba **
UN vote condemns U.S. trade embargo on Cuba

From The Militant, December 11,1992

By Sara Lobman

UNITED NATIONS--The United Nations General Assembly, meeting
November 24, overwhelmingly approved a resolution condemning
the U.S.-organized trade embargo against Cuba. Only the United
States, Israel, and Romania opposed the resolution, a fact that
reflected the decreasing isolation of Cuba in the world and the
growing tensions between the different imperialist powers under
the impact of the world economic crisis.

    Canada, New Zealand, and France, faced with the need to
defend their own trade and markets, were among the 59 nations
that supported the resolution.

    Seventy-one delegations, including Britain, Germany, and
the rest of the European Community, abstained.

    The debate in the General Assembly came just a month
after President George Bush signed into law the so-called Cuban
Democracy Act, also known as the Torricelli bill. This measure is
intended to tighten the U.S. embargo on Cuba--imposed more than
30 years ago--by restricting its trade with other countries.

    It forbids foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies to trade
with Cuba and closes U.S. ports to ships that have called on Cuba
within the previous six months. In addition, it bars any ships
carrying goods or passengers "in which Cuba or a Cuban national
has any interest."

    The stated aim of the Cuban Democracy Act is to hasten the
collapse of the Cuban government. It seeks to use the huge weight
of the U.S. economy in the world to hinder the ability of other
countries to trade with Cuba.

    The UN resolution, submitted by Cuba, was titled "Necessity
of Ending the Economic, Commercial and Financial Embargo
Imposed by the United States Against Cuba." While the text of the
resolution did not mention the United States by name, it
expressed concern over the recent "promulgation and application
by Member States of laws and regulations whose extra-territorial
effects affect the sovereignty of other States and the legitimate
interest of entities or persons under their jurisdiction, and
freedom of navigation."

    The resolution called on all states to refrain from passing
such laws, and to repeal or invalidate any that might already be
in force. It also places a report and discussion on the
implementation of the resolution before the 48th session of the
General Assembly next year. Since the UN General Assembly does
not have the power to make binding decisions, the vote on
November 25 does not compel the United States to take any
action.

VOTE REFLECTS COMPETING TRADE INTERESTS

    During the discussion the representatives of many
governments pointedly explained that they could not allow a
third party to determine who their country traded with. "The
government of Mexico will always firmly reject any attempt to
apply in its territory the legislation of any other state," stated
Jorge Montano, Mexico's permanent representative to the United
Nations.

    Ambassador Ronaldo Mota Sardenberg, representative of
Brazil, said that subsidiary trade was regulated only "by Brazilian
legislation, by international agreements to which Brazil is a party,
and by the decisions of international organizations of which Brazil
is a member."

    "Principles are involved which directly affect our economic
interests," said the New Zealand representative in explaining why
his government was supporting the Cuban resolution. The
Canadian delegate made a similar point, while assuring the United
States that Canada's vote "does not reflect involvement in a
dispute between the United States and Cuba, or complacency with
Cuba's human rights record."

    Britain's United Nations representative, speaking on behalf
of the 12-nation European Community, criticized the "extra-
territorial application of U.S. jurisdiction" and called the U.S. law a
"violation of a general principle of international law and the
sovereignty of independent nations."

    Both Britain and Canada have enacted laws that forbid U.S.
subsidiaries operating on their territory to obey the provisions of
the Cuban Democracy Act.

U.S.-LED EMBARGO WEAKENS

    The inability of Washington to rally even its closet allies to
its side in this vote is an indication of the difficulty it is having in
maintaining the economic embargo against Cuba under conditions
where every capitalist nation is competing for shrinking world
markets.

    Capitalist countries today account for the majority of Cuba's
trade. Canada, Spain, Sweden, Austria, Germany, Switzerland,
Britain, Japan, Italy, and Belgium are all engaged in significant
business with Cuba. U.S. subsidiaries abroad carried out $718
million worth of trade with Cuba in 1991,

    The increased trade with Cuba by other capitalist countries,
and by U.S. subsidiaries abroad, has been a source of controversy
within the U.S. ruling class. While there are those who want to
prevent all trade with Cuba in order to destroy the revolution, a
significant section of the ruling class argues that U.S. capitalists
will be hurt by being denied access to a market courted by their
rivals.

    Earlier this year the U.S. Justice Department filed charges
against Cargill, Inc. the giant Minneapolis-based brain merchant,
claiming that the company, three of its Minnesota executives, and
two executives from Cargill International--its Geneva,
Switzerland, affiliate--were part of a scheme to sell Cuban sugar
on the world market.

BUSH GIVES LAST-MINUTE SUPPORT

    This conflict was reflected in the discussions that led to the
signing of the Cuban Democracy Act in late October. Up until a few
weeks before he signed the Torricelli bill into law, Bush had long
opposed it, arguing that such a bill would lead to otherwise
unnecessary conflicts with U.S. allies.

    His final decision to support the bill was based primarily on
narrow electoral considerations, not the overall interests of the
U.S. ruling class. President-elect William Clinton had seized on the
Cuban Democracy Act in his presidential campaign and was
making inroads among right-wing Cuban-Americans forces in
Florida, long considered a Bush stronghold.

    In a final effort to win the presidential election, Bush
jumped on the bandwagon, acting to show his new support for the
bill in as partisan a way as possible. He even refused to invite the
bill's chief sponsors, Democratic Congressman Robert Torricelli
and Senator Robert Graham, to the signing ceremony.

    The fact that the U.S. rulers will pay for Bush's 11th-hour
move was shown by the UN vote. Washington's position is
particularly untenable at a time when the U.S. government is
trying to push back the share of the market for agricultural
products claimed by French and other European Community
capitalists, by forcing them to decrease government protection of
their exports. Washington is carrying out this campaign in the
name of "free trade."

EMBARGO PART OF 30-YEAR CAMPAIGN

    In presenting the resolution to the General Assembly,
Cuba's permanent representative to the United Nations, Alcibiades
Hidalgo Basulto, reminded delegates of the more than 30-year
history of aggression by the United States against revolutionary
Cuba, calling the embargo the most serious form of this
aggression. He explained that "the net of anti-Cuban laws
constructed during 30 years by eight U.S. administrations has had
an ominous influence" on Cuba's economy.

    Hidalgo explained that the U.S. embargo violated both
international law and the United Nations Charter. Its aim, he said,
is clearly to overthrow a sovereign government and to "impose
upon the Cuban people a political, social, and economic system to
the liking of the United States and selected by it and, essentially.
to re-establish the domination the U.S. exerted on Cuba during the
darkest period of our history."

    The Cuban statement explained that the U.S. legislation
imposed severe restrictions on shipping "in violation of the
principle of freedom of navigation."

    These laws violate the sovereignty not only of Cuba, but of
other nations and of the citizens of the United States itself. "The
freedom of [U.S.] citizens to travel to my country is restricted,"
Hidalgo told the United Nations.

    "Not even a single economic or social element of Cuban
reality escapes to consequences of the blockade," the Cuban
ambassador explained. The most recent studies estimate that the
cost of the embargo to the Cuban people has been $38 billion in
32 years.

    Other representatives speaking in favor of the Cuban
resolution included Ambassador Nugroho Wisnumurti of
Indonesia, who spoke on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, as
well as the delegates from Venezuela, Iraq, and Zimbabwe.
 ________
The Militant newspaper is a socialist newsweekly.  An
introductory subscription costs $10 for 12 weeks. Write to The
Militant, 410 West Street, New York, NY. 10014.

** End of text from cdp:reg.cuba **