Tag: Syria

Cuban Speech to Friends of U.N. Charter 

On February 25, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Parrilla gave the following speech at a meeting in New York City of the Group of Friends of the U.N. Charter.[1]

“In the current international juncture, it is necessary to reflect on the United Nations Organization that we have built and which celebrates this year its eightieth anniversary.

The aspiration to maintain peace, the purpose that guided the creation of the organization, remains a challenge. Tensions are rising, threats to international security are increasing and there are attempts to impose new forms of domination.”

“While trillions of dollars continue to be squandered in the arms race, fewer and fewer resources are allocated to the hundreds of millions of people who are victims of hunger and poverty, making it increasingly difficult to close the growing gap in wealth distribution.”

“Multilateralism is progressively weakening and the role of international organizations is being ignored. They are being threatened with conditioning and funding cuts.

“The current US administration has shown its contempt for the multilateral system and its institutions.  Its shameful withdrawal from the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the World Health Organization, the Human Rights Council and the suspension of funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) are recent examples of this behavior.”

“By supporting the Palestinian genocide against the Palestinian people, the US government confirms its support to the philosophy of war and the doctrine of dispossession. Its plans to occupy Gaza and displace its population represent an escalation of ethnic cleansing, in flagrant violation of International Law.”

“The inaction of the Security Council in the face of these events damages the credibility of the UN.”

“I would like to propose that the Group of Friends of the Charter intervene at the upcoming Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to denounce the flagrant violations of International Humanitarian Law committed by the Occupying Power in the occupied Palestinian territories.”

“With the plans of domination announced by the new administration towards our region, the United States intends to launch a new imperialist offensive against the peoples of Our America, anchored in the archaic and interventionist Monroe Doctrine.”

“As part of this policy, we reject the decision, announced on January 20, to include Cuba again in the arbitrary and unilateral List of State Sponsor of Terrorism, a few days after the previous administration decided otherwise. Such a measure confirms the discredit of the aforementioned list; ignores the consistent demand of international voices, including this Group of Friends, and seeks to further tighten the impacts of the blockade against Cuba.”

“We invite the members of the Group of Friends to continue denouncing the new and dangerous imperialist attack against our region.”

“I would like to conclude by acknowledging Venezuela whose effective coordination has guided our works since its foundation. We also welcome the possibility of incorporating new members to the Group.”

“We support the work plan outlined for this year.”

“Cuba will continue to defend, firmly and consistently, the Charter of the United Nations and International Law, and will remain committed to the principles of the Proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a Zone of Peace.”

The Group of Friends[2]

The Group “was launched on 06 July 2021, in New York [City], and, to date, it is composed of 18 Member States: Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, China, Cuba, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mali, Nicaragua, the State of Palestine, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Syria, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe. Angola and Cambodia were founding members of the Group of Friends.”

The Group members “agree that the Charter of the United Nations is both a milestone and a true act of faith that for the past 78 years has filled the entire international community with hope on the best of humanity and brings it together to ensure the common well-being of present and future generations. They consider that the purposes and principles enshrined therein are indispensable for preserving and promoting, among others, international peace and security, the rule of law, economic development and social progress, and all human rights for all, in an ever increasingly connected world.”

The members also ‘consider that multilateralism, which is at the core of the Charter, is currently under an unprecedented attack, which, in turn, threatens global peace and security. Nowadays, the world is seeing a growing resort to unilateralism, marked by isolationist and arbitrary actions, including the imposition of unilateral coercive measures or the withdrawal from landmark agreements and multilateral institutions, as well as by attempts to undermine critical efforts to tackle common and global challenges.”

“In addition, they believe that the international community is currently struggling with both the continued attempts to disown the diversity of our world and the very basic principles of international relations, and with the systematic violations to the norms of international law and the tenets of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular to the detriment of developing countries, by certain powers that seem to claim a non-existent “exceptionalism” that disregards, for instance, the principle of sovereign equality of States, in an attempt to establish a so-called “rules-based order” with norms that remain unknown and have not been necessarily agreed upon by States, as is the case with the set of norms and principles contained in the UN Charter, and which are the basis for modern-day international law.”

The Group has adopted the following set of its objectives:

“1. The Group of Friends, as part of the common quest of its Member States for making further progress towards achieving full respect for international law, shall strive to preserve, promote and defend the prevalence and validity of the UN Charter, which, in the current international juncture, has a renewed and even more important value and relevance.”

“2. The Group of Friends shall strive to ensure full, permanent and effective – and not selectively or conveniently – fulfillment of obligations under the UN Charter and compliance with its letter and spirit, conscious of the fact that this is the legal instrument with the greatest scope and legitimacy in the world, which has prevented and shall continue to prevent humankind from suffering once again the horrors and untold sorrow of the scourge of war.”

“3. The Group of Friends shall serve as a platform for, among others, promoting the prevalence of legality over force and for discussing, articulating possible means and coordinating joint initiatives for fostering respect for the principles of sovereignty, equality of States, non-interference in the internal affairs of States, peaceful settlement of disputes, and refraining from the use or threat of use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, as enshrined in the UN Charter, as well as for the values of dialogue, tolerance and solidarity, mindful of the fact that these are all at the core of international relations and necessary for peaceful coexistence among nations.”

Cuban Reactions to the Cuban Foreign Minister’s Speech [3]

Diario de Cuba reported the following negative comments about the above speech from other Cubans:

  • Maritza Camero: “Creativity is non-existent and it is not worthy that resistance should be only from the people. Leaders should be the first examples of resistanceand if they look closely they will realize that they are not.”
  • Mara Piedras Velarde: ” It is easy to ask for resistance when you live with all the comforts” and Jorge Vega Ramos added: “What nerve! While they kill the majority of the people in life, they talk about resistance , and they live better than the millionaires.”
  • Luis Hernández Batista: ” Hypocrites are what they are. With their bellies full, they ask for resistance from a people in total miserydue to their ineptitude.”
  • Elizabeth Godínez: “From his comfort zone, not knowing what 23-hour blackouts are like and having all his needs covered, anyone can speak up and stand firm. In this country, people don’t lead by example, that’s why we are where we are. Oh, and when it’s his week in a hotel in Varadero, he (Bruno) will go there like Juan who kills himself, maintaining his selfless firmness.”
  • Fara Martha González Fernández: “What an absurd phrase, creative resistance! What would be the creative part? Seeing how we fade away in a more beautiful way?Or how do we make art with the hunger and misery we are experiencing? They are specialists in creating absurd concepts and empty discourses.”
  • Gonzalez Monyk: “I agree with being sovereign, but we have not had social justice for a long time, and resisting is becoming more difficult because many families do not have even the most basic things. Instead of talking about resistance, they should talk about changes, listening to the youngest, accepting ideas, changes to really get out of this dark and gloomy hole where we are, and do not talk to me about a blockade that has always been there and we have never been as bad as we are now.”
  • Jose Martinez: “What right is he talking about and what social justice, if they have just opened dollar stores that the people neither have nor are they paid for. The people resist because they have no right to protest against the blackouts of more than 20 hours and the misery and hunger in Cuba.

=============================

[1] Statement by Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla, Minister of Foreign Affairs at Group of Friends of the Charter of the United Nations, Feb. 25, 2025.

[2] About the Group of Friends of the Charter of the United Nations.

[3]The regime hammers at the UN with ‘creative reistance’ and Cubans are outraged: ‘they should talk about changes,’ Diario de Cuba (Feb. 26, 2025).

U.S. Again Ranks Cuba in Worst Category for Human Trafficking

On June 24, the U.S. State Department released its 2023 Trafficking in Persons Report on human trafficking, whose “severe forms” are defined in the U.S. Trafficking Victims Proetection Act (TVPA) as: “sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such an act has not attained 18 years of age” or “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.”[1]

U.S. Secretary of State’s Comments

U.S. Seretary of State Antony J. Blinken opened the State Department’s session with the following message:

  • “Human trafficking is a stain on the conscience of our society.  It fuels crime, corruption, and violence.  It distorts our economies and harms our workers. And it violates the fundamental right of all people to be free.”
  • “Around the globe, an estimated 27 million people are exploited for labor, services, and commercial sex.  Through force, fraud, and coercion, they are made to toil in fields and factories, in restaurants and residences.  Traffickers prey on some of the world’s most marginalized and vulnerable individuals – profiting from their plight.”
  • “The State Department’s annual Trafficking in Persons Report provides the world’s most comprehensive assessment of this abhorrent practice, as well as efforts by governments and stakeholders around the globe to combat it.  By measuring progress in 188 countries – including the United States – we are advancing President Biden’s commitment to prevent trafficking, prosecute perpetrators, and protect survivors.”
  • “Even as this resource covers long-standing forms and methods of trafficking, it also examines the growing role of technology in both facilitating exploitation and countering it.”
  • “Digital tools have amplified the reach, scale, and speed of trafficking. Perpetrators use dating apps and online ads to recruit victims.  They use online platforms to sell illicit sexual content.  They leverage encrypted messaging and digital currencies to evade detection.”
  • “At the same time, technology is also one of our most powerful tools to combat this enduring scourge.  Mobile phones, social media platforms, and artificial intelligence make it possible for advocates and law enforcement to raise greater awareness about the rights of workers and migrants, locate victims and perpetrators of online sexual exploitation, and analyze large amounts of data to detect emerging human trafficking trends.”
  • “As technology makes it easier for traffickers to operate across geographies and jurisdictions, those of us committed to rooting out this horrendous crime – in government, businesses, civil society – can and must work together and coordinate our efforts.”

U.S. Ambassador at Large’s Comments

Cindy Dyer, the U.S. Ambassor at Large, added comments about this report that focused on the importance of partners (survivors, other governments and non-governmental agencies) in combatting this trafficking.

Ranking of Countries

The report ranked all countries of  the world into the following tiers:

  • “Tier 1 Countries whose governments fully meet the TVPA’s minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.” (30 countries, including the U.S.)
  • “Tier 2 Countries whose governments do not fully meet the TVPA’s minimum standards but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards.” (105 countries)
  • “Tier 2 Watch List. Countries whose governments do not fully meet the TVPA’s minimum standards but are making significant efforts to bring themselves into compliance with those standards, and for which:the estimated number of victims of severe forms of trafficking is very significant or is significantly increasing and the country is not taking proportional concrete actions; or there is a failure to provide evidence of increasing efforts to combat severe forms of trafficking in persons from the previous year, including increased investigations, prosecutions, and convictions of trafficking crimes, increased assistance to victims, and decreasing evidence of complicity in severe forms of trafficking by government officials.” (26 countries)
  • “Tier 3. Countries whose governments do not fully meet the TVPA’s minimum standards and are not making significant efforts to do so.” In addition, “The TVPA, as amended, lists additional factors to determine whether a country should be on Tier 2 (or Tier 2 Watch List) versus Tier 3: the extent to which the country is a country of origin, transit, or destination for severe forms of trafficking; the extent to which the country’s government does not meet the TVPA’s minimum standards and, in particular, the extent to which officials or government employees have been complicit in severe forms of trafficking; reasonable measures that the government would need to undertake to be in compliance with the minimum standards in light of the government’s resources and capabilities to address and eliminate severe forms of trafficking in persons; the extent to which the government is devoting sufficient budgetary resources to investigate and prosecute human trafficking, convict and sentence traffickers; and obtain restitution for victims of human trafficking; and the extent to which the government is devoting sufficient budgetary resources to protect victims and prevent the crime from occurring.” (24 countries, including Cuba. The other countries so ranked are Afghanistan, Algeria, Belarus, Burma, Cambodia, Chad, China (People’s Republic of), Curacao, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Guinea-Bissau, Iran, Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of ), Macau, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Russia, Sint Maarten, South Sudan, Syria, Turkmenistan and Venezuela.)

Report’s Comments on Cuba

 In the section entitled “Topics of Special Interest” the report discussed  “Human Trafficking in Cuba’s Labor Export Program.” Here is what it said:

“Each year, the Cuban government sends tens of thousands of workers around the globe under multi-year cooperation agreements negotiated with receiving countries.  While medical missions remain the most prevalent, the Cuban government also profited from other similarly coercive labor export programs, including those involving teachers, artists, athletes and coaches, engineers, forestry technicians, and nearly 7,000 merchant mariners worldwide.   According to a report published by the Cuban government, by the end of 2023, there were more than 22,000 government-affiliated Cuban workers in over 53 countries, and medical professionals composed 75 percent of its exported workforce.  The COVID-19 pandemic increased the need for medical workers in many places around the world, and the Cuban government used the opportunity to expand its reach by increasing the number of its medical personnel abroad through the Henry Reeve Brigades, which Cuba first initiated in 2005 to respond to natural disasters and epidemics.  Experts estimate the Cuban government collects $6 billion to $8 billion annually from its export of services, which includes the medical missions.  The labor export program remains the largest foreign revenue source for the Cuban government.”

“There are serious concerns with Cuba’s recruitment and retention practices surrounding the labor export program.  While the conditions of each international labor mission vary from country to country, the Cuban government subjects all government-affiliated workers to the same coercive laws.  Cuba has a government policy or pattern to profit from forced labor in the labor export program, which includes foreign medical missions.  The Cuban government labels workers who leave the program without completing it as “deserters,” a category that under Cuban immigration law deems them as “undesirable.”  The government bans workers labeled as “deserters” and “undesirables” from returning to Cuba for eight years, preventing them from visiting their families in Cuba.  It categorizes Cuban nationals who do not return to the country within 24 months as having “emigrated.”  Individuals who emigrate lose all their citizen protections, rights under Cuban law, and any property they left behind.  These government policies and legal provisions, taken together, coerce workers and punish those seeking to exercise freedom of movement.  According to credible sources, by 2021, the Cuban government had sanctioned 40,000 professionals under these provisions, and by 2022, there were approximately 5,000 children forcibly separated from their parents due to the government’s policies surrounding the program.”

“Complaints filed with the International Criminal Court and the UN indicate most workers did not volunteer for the program, some never saw a contract or knew their destination, many had their passports confiscated by Cuban officials once they arrived at their destination, and almost all had “minders” or overseers.  According to the complaints and survivors, Cuban heads of mission in the country subjected workers to surveillance, prevented them from freely associating with locals, and imposed a strict curfew.  Cuba also confiscated between 75 and 90 percent of each worker’s salary.  As a result of the well-founded complaints and information about the exploitative nature of Cuba’s labor export program, at the end of 2023, the UN Special Rapporteur for Contemporary Forms of Slavery filed a new communication outlining the persistent concerns with the program, particularly for Cuban workers in Italy, Qatar, and Spain.”

“While exploitation, including forced labor, of workers remains the primary concern with the program, Cuba’s practices can also negatively impact a host country’s healthcare system.  Survivors of the program have reported being forced by the Cuban in-country mission director to falsify medical records and misrepresent critical information to justify their presence and need to local authorities.  Some individuals reported discarding medications, fabricating names, and documenting medical procedures that never occurred.  When medical workers refused to comply with the demands of the Cuban in-country mission director, they faced punishment and retaliation.  While the Cuban government promotes workers as highly skilled medical professionals and specialists, these workers often lack adequate medical training to treat complex conditions.  These practices are unethical, negligent, exploitative, and risk the lives of those they serve.”

“Governments should make efforts to combat human trafficking, and this includes not purchasing goods or services made or provided with forced labor.  Governments that utilize Cuba’s labor export programs despite the serious concerns with the program should at a minimum conduct frequent and unannounced labor inspections to screen these workers for trafficking indicators and employ victim-centered interviewing techniques.  These host governments should ensure all Cuban workers are subject to the same laws, regulations, and protections as for other migrant workers and that they are not brought via a negotiated agreement with the Government of Cuba that limits these protections or exempts Cuban workers from Wage Protections Systems or other tools designed to strengthen transparency.  Officials should ensure workers maintain complete control of their passports and medical certifications and can provide proof of full salary payment to bank accounts under the workers’ control.  They should scrutinize medical reports produced by these workers, offer protection for those who face retaliation and punishment for terminating their employment, and raise awareness of trafficking risks for all foreign workers, including government-affiliated Cuban workers.”

Cuba’s Comments on This Report[2]

On June 24, Granma (the official voice of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba) said, “[A lier is] the neighboring government, that one to the north of the archipelago, which, like the naked king in a children’s story, displays its falsehoods about Cuba, without realizing that its shame is in the air; so arrogant is its arrogance.The current U.S. administration arbitrarily insists on keeping Cuba in the worst category (level 3) in its recently published annual State Department report on human trafficking. The actions of the Washington authorities, marked by political motivations, deserved the response, from . . . the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba and President of the Republic, Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez [who said]:

“The empire has once again listed Cuba in its manipulative report on human trafficking, an outrageous maneuver in the open war against Cuban medical collaboration. Enough cynicism, Secretary Blinken. You are well aware of our zero-tolerance policy for this criminal practice. To justify the action, the report referred to the year 2023 uses contradictory arguments, based on the defamation of the work of Cuban medical collaboration in more than a hundred countries. Cuba’s cooperation with other peoples in the field of health is so humane that they have to attack it. It bothers them that, in the midst of the lordship of perversity and dishonor with which they pretend to dominate the world, the unsubmissive island brings light to the darkness and health to those who suffer.”

“But it is not fortuitous to include Cuba in spurious lists, to consider the island in the worst category in its report on human trafficking allows the White House to justify the blockade and the endless saga of coercive measures aimed at starving its people.”

“It would seem that the world is upside down: those who promote human trafficking, encouraging illegal departures, those who hinder the normal migratory flow between the two nations, are the ones who judge and punish.”

“Those who do not allow – to cite just one example – our baseball players to benefit from an agreement that prevents them from falling into the arms of human traffickers to reach the MLB, are the same ones who seek to condemn those who maintain a zero tolerance policy against human trafficking.”

Conclusion

This is a very complicated report, and the State Department website says, “This posted version is not fully accessible, meaning it may be inaccessible or incompatible with assistive technology. An accessible version will be posted as soon as the ongoing updates are concluded.” (Thus, there may be errors in this post and readers are invited to note any such corrections.)

=============================

[1]U.S. State Dep’t, 2023 Trafficking in Persons Report (June 2024); The US considers that the regime ‘is not making significant efforts’ to combat human trafficking, Diario de Cuba (June 24, 2024).

[2] Capote, Accusing Cuba of human trafficking, another ruse to justify economic warfare, Granma (June 26, 2024).

U.S. Excludes Cuba from List of Non-Cooperators Against Terrorism     

On May 15 U.S. Secretary of Antony Blinken released the State Department’s annual list of the following four states that did not fully cooperate with the U.S. anti-terrorism efforts: Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Iran, Syria and Venezuela. [1]

The Secretary also stated that the U.S. had determined that the circumstances for the [prior] certification of Cuba for this list had changed and thus the new list excluded Cuba. The changes were Colombia’s cancellation of its request for Cuba to extradite commanders of ELN (guerrilla group) and the 2023 resumption of U.S.-Cuba police cooperation, including the fight against terrorism

The Secretary closed by stating that this list is not the same as the U.S. list of State Sponsors of Terrorism, which by statute establishes specific legal criteria for recission which have not been met by Cuba.

Reactions

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez also had a similar reaction. He said, “All political manipulation of the issue should cease and our arbitrary and unjust inclusion on the list of countries sponsoring terrorism should end.”

On May 16, the Department’s Principal Deputy Spokesperson, Vidant Patel, made the following response to a journalist’s question about these issues:

  • “So the designation of a state sponsor of terrorism is a totally separate process from an NFCC certification. There have been countries certified as NFCCs without being designated as state sponsors of terrorism, and vice versa. U.S. law establishes specific statutory criteria for rescinding any state sponsor of terrorism designation, and any review of Cuba’s status on this would need to be based on the law and the criteria established by Congress.”
  • “So to take a step back on this NFCC . . . process, . . . the department determined that the circumstances for Cuba’s certifications as not fully cooperating country have changed from 2022 to 2023. First, Cuba’s refusal to engage with Colombia on extradition requests for National Liberation Army members supported Cuba’s NFCC certification for 2022. In August of 2022, pursuant to an order from Colombian President Petro, Colombia’s attorney general announced that arrest warrant would be suspended against 17 ELN commanders, including those whose extradition Colombia had previously requested from Cuba. Moreover, the U.S. and Cuba resumed law enforcement cooperation in 2023, including on counterterrorism.”
  • “Therefore, we’ve determined that Cuba’s continued certification as a not fully cooperating country was no longer appropriate. . . .{S]ales of defense articles to Cuba will continue to be restricted under Section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act given Cuba’s status as a state sponsor of terrorism. Moreover, Cuba remains subject to a incredibly comprehensive embargo still.”
  • “[A state]can be a cooperator on counterterrorism, but we still believe that there are actions that they are undertaking that of the support of terrorist activities. I’m not going to get into those specifically from up here.”

As a blogger interested in legal issues relating to Cuba and a frequent commentator on the U.S. listing Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism, I was surprised by this related category of non-cooperators against terrorism.

=======================

[1] [State] Department Press Briefing, May 16, 2024; The US Excludes Cuba from the list of countries that do not cooperate in the fight against terrorism, Diario de Cuba (May 15, 2024). Torres, U.S. Removes Cuba from list of countries ‘not cooperating fully’ with anti-terrrorism efforts, Miami Herald (May 16, 2024), As a non-subscriber to the Miami Herald, this blogger was unable to read this article. We would welcome a comment of any additional details in this article from a reader who has access to that newspaper

 

 

Two U.S. Congress Officials Object to O’Grady’s Defense of U.S. Designation of Cuba as State Sponsor of Terrorism   

U.S. Representative Jim McGovern (Dem., Mass.) and U.S. Senator Peter Welch (Dem., VT) jointly voice their objection to Mary Anastasi O’Grady’s defense of the  U.S. designation of Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism because, they argue, she presented no evidence for that action.[1]

Yes, McGovern and Welch say, “Cuban officials meet with counterparts in Russia and China, but so do American officials. Alliances with Russia and China, also cited as evidence of support for terrorism, would put half the world on the list. When it comes to spying, Cuba and other countries have had spies in the U.S.”

“Ms. O’Grady’s argument about Cuba’s support for Venezuela’s oppressive dictator might sound convincing, but Venezuela itself isn’t on the [terrorism] list. Cuba harbors some aging American fugitives, but none of them have been accused of international terrorism.”

“To be sure, there are [other] countries that belong on the list. [Two of them are North Korea and Syria.] North Korea threatens to launch nuclear weapons at us. Syria used chemical weapons on its own people and finances regional terrorists. Iran funds the rockets that rain down on Israel.”

“Cuba’s government is repressive; its economy is in shambles. If those were criteria for being on the list, it would be a mile long. It’s fine to criticize Cuba, but let’s be honest about who the real terrorists are. A policy of constructive engagement with Cuba might lead to more democracy. Wrongly labeling it as a sponsor of international terrorism only furthers a broken status quo.”

Conclusion

This blog has repeatedly and consistently argued that the U.S. designation of Cuba as a State Sponsor of Terrorism is unjustified. [2]

===========================

[1] Compare McGovern & Welch, Cuba Is No Sponsor of International Terrorism, W.S.J. (Jan. 31, 2024), wit O’Grady, Why Cuba Belongs on the Terrorism List. W.S.J. (Jan. 21, 2024),

[2] E.g., Cuba Still on List of State Sponsors of Terrorism, dwkcommentaries.com (Dec. 1, 2023); U.S. Senators and Representatives Demand Ending of U.S. Designation of Cuba as State Sponsor of Terrorism (Jan. 12, 2024);COMMENT: Another Congressman Calls for Ending Cuba as State Sponsor of Terrorism (Jan. 13, 2024).

 

 

 

U.S. Report on Latest Session of U.N. Human Rights Council 

The U.S. State Department on October 17 delivered its report on the just-concluded 54th session of the U.N. Human Rights Council.[1] Here are the highlights of that report:

“Establishing an investigative mandate in Sudan . . . [The U.S.] was a member of the core group that established an international fact-finding mission to investigate human rights violations and abuses in Sudan. . . as reports of atrocities and other abuses continue, such as conflict-related sexual violence, ethnically motivated killings, and burning of villages in Darfur and elsewhere.”

Renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in the Russian Federation . . . [The U.S. co-sponsored this renewal as] Moscow’s campaign has worsened life for Russia’s citizens and made it dangerous for civil society organizations, media, and other independent voices to provide information or express dissent.  Russia continues to hold hundreds of political prisoners, including many sentenced for their criticism of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine. Impunity for human rights abuses in the North Caucasus region, including enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, also remains an urgent concern.”

“Renewing the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Afghanistan . . . [The U.S. co-sponsored this renewal] as the Taliban continues to target women and girls, government critics, former officials, and human rights activists through detentions, physical abuse, intimidation, and killings.”

“Advancing Gender Equality. . .[as the U.S.] reaffirmed its support for eliminating discriminatory laws and practices against women and girls in all their diversity, advanced the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, and underscored the importance of the right of everyone to education.  We co-sponsored and helped defend resolutions that advance gender equality, including Preventing Maternal Mortality and Morbidity and Girls Education.  The United States helped defeat a slate of hostile amendments seeking to weaken inclusive gender language from these and other resolutions.”

“Supporting Racial Equity and Justice . . . [the U.S.] demonstrated its deep commitment to addressing the challenges of systemic racism both at home and abroad, . . .[by joining] consensus on the renewal of the Mandate of the Working Group of Experts on People of African Descent, [and by co-sponsoring] the resolution entitled Human Rights and Indigenous Peoples, which laid the foundation for enhancing the participation of Indigenous Peoples in the work of the Council.”

“Other Priorities: . . .[The U.S.] co-sponsored resolutions to continue reporting on Burundi and provide assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights . . . [and by joining] consensus on resolutions providing human rights assistance in Cambodia, Yemen, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and the Central African Republic; [and by co-sponsoring] thematic resolutions on such topics including enforced or involuntary disappearances; centrality of care and support from a human rights perspective; the promotion of truth, justice, reparation, and guarantees of non-reoccurrence; the human rights of older persons; the World Programme for Human Rights Education; and the International Year of the Family.”

“Joint Statements: . . . [The U.S. led joint statements on [a] the heightened risks associated with surveillance technologies, including commercial spyware, and the importance of safeguards and responsible practices in the development and use of these tools to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and [b] safeguarding the human rights of women and girls across the Americas.”. . .[In addition, the U.S.] joined joint statements on Syria, Sri Lanka, Ukraine, Ethiopia, the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh, President Nelson Mandela’s Commitment to the UDHR and VDPA, sexism in sport, antisemitism in sport, rights of intersex persons, the rights of LGBTQI+ persons, reprisals, social reintegration of prisoners, and enhancing access to assistive technologies for older persons, and vaccination, immunization, and the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health.”

“Side Events: [The U.S. co-sponsored events] … on combatting antisemitism, … the Holocaust, and on human rights in Russia, Yemen, and Ukraine.”

=====================

[1] U.S. Dep’t State, Outcomes of the 54th Session of the UN Human Rights Council (Oct. 17, 2023).

President Trump Announces Categories for U.S. Admission of Refugees for Fiscal 2021             

On September 30, the U.S. State Department announced that President Trump had reduced the U.S. quota for admission of refugees to 15,000 for Fiscal Year 2021 (October 1, 2020-September 30, 2021) that would be documented in a subsequent presidential determination.[1]

That Presidential Determination confirming the 15,000 limitation was issued on October 28 in the form of a memorandum to the Secretary of State. It also announced allocations “among refugees of special humanitarian concern to the United States.”[2] Here are those allocations:

Number Category
5,000 Refugees who: have been persecuted or have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of religion; or are within a category of aliens established under subsections (b) and (c) of section 599D of Title V, Public Law 101-167, as amended (the Lautenberg and Specter Amendments). [(i) “aliens who are or were nationals and residents of the Soviet Union and who share common characteristics that identify them as targets of persecution in the Soviet Union on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion,” including “nationals and residents of the Soviet Union and who are Jews or Evangelical Christians ” and (ii) “aliens who are or were nationals and residents of Vietnam, Laos, or Cambodia and who share common characteristics that identify them as targets of persecution in such respective foreign state on such an account.
4,000 Refugees who are within a category of aliens listed in section 1243(a) of the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act of 2007, Title XII, Div. A, Public Law 110-181, as amended: “[1) Iraqis who were or are employed by the United States Government, in Iraq;(2) Iraqis who establish to the satisfaction of the Secretary of State that they are or were employed in Iraq by–(A) a media or nongovernmental organization headquartered in the United States; or (B) an organization or entity closely associated with the United States mission in Iraq that has received United States Government funding through an official and documented contract, award, grant, or cooperative agreement; and 3) spouses, children, and parents whether or not  accompanying or following to join, and sons, daughters, and siblings of aliens described in paragraph (1), paragraph (2), or section 1244(b)(1); and(4) Iraqis who are members of a religious or minority community, have been identified by the Secretary of State, or the designee of the Secretary, as a persecuted group, and have close family members . . . in the United States.”
1,000 Refugees who are nationals or habitual residents of El Salvador, Guatemala, or Honduras.
5,000 Other refugees in the following groups: those referred to the United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) by a United States Embassy in any location; those who will be admitted through a Form I-730 following-to-join petition or who gain access to the USRAP for family reunification through the P-3 process; those currently located in Australia, Nauru, or Papua New Guinea who gain access to the USRAP pursuant to an arrangement between the United States and Australia; those who are nationals or habitual residents of Hong Kong, Venezuela, or Cuba; and those in the USRAP who were in “Ready for Departure” status as of September 30, 2019.
15,000 TOTAL

In addition, the President authorized the Secretary of State, subject to certain conditions, “to transfer unused admissions from a particular allocation above to one or more other allocations, if there is a need for greater admissions for the allocation to which the admissions will be transferred.”

The President, subject to certain conditions, also authorized the Secretary of State to consider “the following persons . . ., if otherwise qualified, . . . [as] refugees for the purpose of admission to the United States within their countries of nationality or habitual residence: a. persons in Cuba; b. persons in Eurasia and the Baltics; c. persons in Iraq; d. persons in Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador; and e. in exceptional circumstances, persons identified by a United States Embassy in any location.”

The President specified “that persons from certain high-risk areas of terrorist presence or control, including Somalia, Syria, and Yemen, shall not be admitted as refugees, except those refugees of special humanitarian concern:  (1) who have been persecuted or have a well-founded fear of persecution on account of religion; (2) were referred to the USRAP by a United States Embassy in any location; or (3) who will be admitted through a Form I-730 following-to-join petition or who gain access to the USRAP for family reunification through the P‑3 process.  The threat to United States national security and public safety posed by the admission of refugees from high-risk areas of terrorist presence or control is significant and cannot be fully mitigated at this time.”

Another specification by the President was “ for FY 2021, newly admitted refugees should be placed, to the maximum extent possible, in States and localities that have clearly expressed their willingness to receive refugees under the Department of State’s Reception and Placement Program.  Such cooperation ensures that refugees are resettled in communities that are eager and equipped to support their successful integration into American society and the labor force.”

Finally the President determined “hat assistance to or on behalf of persons applying for admission to the United States as part of the overseas refugee admissions program will contribute to the foreign policy interests of the United States, and I accordingly designate such persons for this purpose.”

Conclusion

 The principal objection to this presidential action is the overall limitation of resettled refugees to 15,000 in one year. The identification of the refugees in the above categories and their allocated numbers presumably are justified.

================================

[1] U.S. Reduces Refugee Admissions to 15,000 for Fiscal 2021, dwkcommentaries.com (Oct. 2, 2020).

[2] White House, Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2021 (Oct. 28, 2020).

 

Secretary of State Pompeo Delivers Speech at the Holy See

On October 2, U.S. Secretary of State Michael Pompeo delivered a speech in Rome at the Holy See’s Symposium on Working with Faith-Based Organizations. He also met with Pope Francis and with two Vatican officials.

Pompeo’s Speech [1]

After mentioning some of the main points of last week’s session on religious freedom at the U.N. that was organized by the U.S., the Secretary recalled, “Then-Pope – now Saint – John Paul II and President Ronald Reagan combined the moral authority of the Holy See with the prosperity and example of the United States, the freest nation on earth, to fight the evil empire [the Soviet Union].  Through patience and unity of purpose, they prevailed. Their words and deeds helped save – helped leave the Soviet leviathan on that ash heap of history.”

“More than 80 percent of mankind [now] lives in places where religious freedom is threatened or entirely denied.  Approximately 71 million people around the world are displaced as refugees.  Roughly 25 million people are caught in human trafficking situations.”

“And it’s no coincidence that it has happened as unfree societies have proliferated. Because when the state rules absolutely, God becomes an absolute threat to authority.  That’s why Cuba cancelled National Catholic Youth Day back in August.”(Emphasis added.) He also had negative words about violations of religious freedom in China, Syria, Iran and Burma.

“We must recognize the roots of religious repression.  Authoritarian regimes and autocrats will never accept a power higher than their own.  And that causes all sorts of assaults on human dignity.

On “the issues most fundamental, on the issues of human dignity and religious freedom, these issues that transcend everyday politics, on the enduring struggle of the individual’s right to believe and worship, we [the Holy See and the U.S.] must – and I know we will – march together.”

The Secretary then discussed the Second U.S. Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom, the U.S.-led gathering on religious freedom at the U.N. last week and the U.S.-initiated Religious Freedom Alliance.[2]

Meeting with Pope Francis [3]

The State Department’s initial statement merely said that Secretary Pompeo had “a private audience with His Holiness Pope Francis.” A subsequent statement adced this summary: “The Pope and the Secretary “reaffirmed the United States and Holy See commitment to advancing religious freedom around the world, and in particular, protecting Christian communities in the Middle East.  The Secretary and Pope Francis also discussed the continued efforts of the United States and the Holy See to promote democracy and human rights globally.”

The Vatican, on the other hand, merely confirmed the meeting’s having taken place, but offered no details. The Associated Press added, “There was no indication that Pompeo, an evangelical Christian, sought any type of spiritual solace from Pope Francis during their meeting.”

Pompeo along with the  U.S. Ambassador to the Holy See, Callista Gingrich (wife of Newt Gingrich, former Republican Congressman), also met with the Vatican’s Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Secretary for Relations with States Archbishop Paul Gallagher. According to the State Department, “Secretary Pompeo thanked Cardinal Parolin and Archbishop Gallagher for the Vatican’s efforts to provide humanitarian assistance and end the suffering of the Venezuelan people. They also discussed the importance of preventing trafficking in persons and advancing international religious freedom. On the Middle East, the Secretary noted U.S. efforts to support Christian minorities, and emphasized the importance of continued calls from the United States and the Vatican to end the humanitarian catastrophe in Syria.”

Conclusion

 Once again, the Secretary had lofty words about religious freedom, an honorable cause. But it mainly was a political promotion for things that the current administration is doing. without any mention of working with faith-based organizations, which was the apparent theme of the Holy See’s Symposium.  There was no humbly walking with God as Micah 6:8 reminds us: “What does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8 (NRSV)(emphasis added).)

And the Secretary could not let this speech occur without an unnecessary and misleading negative word about Cuba. Yes, the Office of Religious Affairs of the Cuban Communist Party did not allow most public celebrations this year of National Catholic Youth Day, except they were permitted in the city of Santiago de Cuba at the eastern end of the island and such celebrations also took place in the premises of the church’s eleven dioceses. Moreover, the cancelation of the other celebrations could have been prompted by Cuba’s current energy shortages, a substanal cause of which is the U.S. sanctions against Venezuela’s shipping oil to the island. [4]

===================================

[1] State Dep’t, Human Dignity and Faith in Free Societies (Oct. 2, 2019).

[2]  E.g., U.S. State Department’s Second Ministerial To Advance Religious Freedom, dwkcommentaries.com (July 21, 2019); U.S. at U.N. Global Call To Protect Religious Freedom, dwkcommentaries.com (Sept. 24, 2019).

3] State Dep’t, Travel to Italy, the Holy See, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Greece, October 1-6, 2019; State Dep’t, Secretary Michael R. Pompeo’s Meeting with Pope Francis (Oct. 3, 2019); State Dep’t, Secretary Pompeo’s Meeting with Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin and Secretary for Relations with States Archbishop Paul Gallagher (Oct. 3, 2019); Lee (Assoc. Press), Pompeo Meets Pope francis as impeachment roils Washington, Wash. Post (Oct. 3, 2019) Assoc. Press, Pompeo Meets Pope francis as Impeachment Roils Washington, N.Y. Times (Oct. 3, 2019).

[4] Catholic public youth day celebrations cancelled in Cuba, Christian Telegraph (Aug. 6, 2019); Bordoni, Pope encourages young Cuban Catholics to become missionary disciples, Vatican News (Aug. 1, 2019); Lopez, Be Transformed ‘Into Missionary Disciples,’ Says Pope in His Message for Cuba’s National Youth Day, Zenit (Aug. 2, 2019).

 

 

President Trump’s Skepticism About John Bolton’s Advice

According to journalists at the Washington Post, President Donald Trump is questioning his Administration’s recent aggressive strategy about Venezuela and about his National Security Advisor, John Bolton, one of the main advocates of such a strategy. [1]

As discussed in an earlier post, last week’s failure of an attempt to takeover the Venezuelan government by Juan Guaidó has prompted Trump to complain about having been misled about how easy it would be for such an attempt. Moreover, these journalists say, Trump’s “dissatisfaction has crystallized around . . . Bolton and . . .i [his] interventionist stance at odds with . . . [Trump’s] view that the United States should stay out of foreign quagmires.”

An unnamed U.S. official who is familiar with U.S.-Venezuela policy says “Trump [privately] has expressed concern that Bolton has boxed him into a corner and gone beyond where he is comfortable.” Nevertheless, two senior administration officials said Bolton’s job was “safe.”

Various current and former officials and outside advisers have said that the failure of last week’s takeover attempt has “effectively shelved serious discussion of a heavy U.S. military response.” One sign of this development was Vice President’s recent speech, as discussed in a prior post, announcing new U.S. measures regarding Venezuela that did not include any use or threat of military force other than the frequent comment that “all options are on the table.”

Trump has himself to blame too. His “approach to foreign intervention is largely ad hoc and idiosyncratic — driven less by ideology than by his hunger for foreign policy victories and confidence in his own deal-making skills.” This “lack of ideological coherence has played to the advantage of “ Bolton and Secretary Pompeo.

Another expert, Richard Haass, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said, ““There is a fundamental conflict between the administration’s desire for regime change and what it is willing to do to bring it about. That is the contradiction of Mr. Trump’s foreign policy.”

John D. Feeley, a former U.S. ambassador and Univision political analyst, said that military intervention in Venezuela is unlikely because it “runs counter to Donald Trump’s 2020 reelection narrative. At a time when you’re pulling people back from Syria, back from Iraq, back from Afghanistan, how do you say we’re going to commit 50-, 100-, 150,000 of our blood and treasure to a country where you can’t tell the bad guys from the good guys?”

Conclusion

This news of Trump’s questioning the wisdom of advice from John Bolton is a welcome surprise. As noted in a prior post, this blogger and others more deeply involved in analyzing national security issues seriously question the wisdom of Bolton’s long-held belief in the use of U.S. military force.

Now is the time for Bolton to leave the government!

====================================

[1] Gearan, Dawsey, Hudson & Kim, A frustrated Trump questions his administration’s Venezuela strategy, Wash. Post (May 8, 2019); Landler, With Mix of Threats and Blandishments, Trump Bandies Policy of Regime Change, N.Y. Times (May 8, 2019).

 

Cuba Religious Freedom in the Eyes of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom   

On April 25, 2018, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom released its annual report on the subject for 28 countries in the world. Of these the Commission concluded that Cuba and 11 other countries had engaged in or tolerated religious freedom violations during 2017 that were serious and “systematic,  or ongoing, or egregious.”[1]

Commission’s Key Findings About Cuba[2]

According to this report, “religious freedom conditions in Cuba remained poor” with the following Key Findings:

  • “The Cuban government engaged in harassment campaigns that included detentions and repeated interrogations targeting religious leaders and activists who advocate for religious freedom.”
  • “Officials threatened to confiscate numerous churches and interrogated religious leaders countrywide about the legal status of their religious properties.”
  • “The government continues to interfere in religious groups’ internal affairs and actively limits, controls, and monitors their religious practice, access to information, and communications through a restrictive system of laws and policies, surveillance, and harassment.”
  • “While the Cuban constitution guarantees freedom of religion or belief, this protection is limited by other constitutional and legal provisions. At the end of the reporting period, 55 religious communities were registered; only registered religious communities are legally permitted to receive foreign visitors, import religious materials, meet in approved houses of worship, and apply to travel abroad for religious purposes.”
  • “The Cuban Communist Party Office of Religious Affairs (ORA) answers only to the Party and so it has broad, largely unchecked power to control religious activity, including approving some religious ceremonies other than worship services, repair or construction of houses of worship, and importation of religious materials.”
  • “Authorities prevent human rights and pro-democracy activists from participating in religious activities, sometimes using force. Almost every Sunday in 2017, the government prevented members of Ladies in White from attending Mass.”
  • “In a positive development, officials verbally promised the Assemblies of God that the government would not confiscate 1,400 of their churches as it threatened to do in 2015 and 2016.”

Commission’s Recommendations About Cuba to U.S. Government[3]

The Commission also made the following recommendations about Cuba to the U.S. Government:

  1. “Publicly denounce violations of religious freedom and related human rights in Cuba.”
  2. “Press the Cuban government to:
  • “Stop harassment of religious leaders;
  • End the practice of violently preventing democracy and human rights activists from attending religious services;
  • End destruction of, threats to destroy, and threats to expropriate houses of worship;
  • Lift restrictions on religious communities buying property, building or repairing houses of worship, holding religious processions, importing religious materials, and admitting religious leaders;
  • Allow unregistered religious groups to operate freely and legally, and repeal government policies that restrict religious services in homes or other personal property;
  • Allow registered and unregistered religious groups to conduct religious education;
  • Cease interference with religious activities and religious communities’ internal affairs; and
  • Hold accountable police and other security personnel for actions that violate the human rights of religious practitioners, including the religious freedom of political prisoners.”
  1. “Increase opportunities for Cuban religious leaders from both registered and unregistered religious communities to travel to, exchange aid and materials with, and interact with coreligionists in the United States.”
  2. “Apply the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, Executive Order 13818, or other relevant targeted tools, to deny U.S. visas to and block the U.S. assets of specific officials and agencies identified as responsible for violations of the right to freedom of religion or belief, including considering responsible officials from the ORA for such measures.”
  3. “Use appropriated funds to advance internet freedom and widespread access to mass media, and protect Cuban activists by supporting the development and accessibility of new technologies and programs to counter censorship and to facilitate the free flow of information in and out of Cuba, as informed by the findings and recommendations of the Cuba Internet Task Force created pursuant to the National Security Presidential Memorandum, ‘Strengthening the Policy of the United States Toward Cuba.’”
  4. “Encourage international partners, including key Latin American and European countries and regional blocs, to ensure violations of freedom of religion or belief and related human rights are part of all formal and informal multilateral or bilateral discussions with Cuba.”

Conclusion

On May 29, the State Department will release its annual report on religious freedom in every other. country in the world.[4] Thereafter we will examine its comments on Cuba and then analyze and evaluate the two reports’ discussion of Cuba.

=================================

[1] U.S. Comm’n Intl Religious Freedom, USCIRF Releases 2018 Annual Report, Recommends 16 Countries be Designated “Countries of Particular Concern,” (April 25, 2018). The other 11 countries in this category (Tier 2) were Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bahrain,  Egypt India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Laos, Malaysia and Turkey. The Commission also recommended that the State Department designate the following 16 countries as “Countries of Particular Concern” (countries whose government engage in or tolerates particularly severe (or systematic, ongoing, and egregious) religious freedom violations: Burma, Central African Republic, China, Eritrea, Iran, Nigeria, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. The Commission is an unusual quasi-governmental body. See U.S. Commission on International Freedom: Structure and Composition, dwkcommentaries.com (May 29, 2013).

[2]  2018 Annual Report at 148-53.

[3]  Id.

[4]  U.S. State Dep’t, Secretary Pompeo To Release the 2017 International Religious Freedom Report (May 25, 2018).