Letter to USAID

 

                   Fund for Reconciliation and Development

                   64 Jean Court, Riverhead, NY  11901

                   1 (917) 859-9025   jmcauliff@ffrd.org   www.ffrd.org

 August 15, 2022

 Ms. Samantha Power

Director
US Agency for International Development


Dear Ms. Power,

We are about to launch a petition to urge USAID to provide assistance to Cuba to recover from the horrendous oil fire at Matanzas.   Help Matanzas Recover | MoveOn

It is unconscionable and counterintuitive that the US did not send immediate help to stop the fire.  The provision by the State Department of a phone number to obtain technical advice prompted expressions of gratitude from Deputy Foreign Minister Fernandez de Cossio and President Diaz-Canel.  (see below)

Cuba was ready to welcome direct timely assistance from Resolve Marine Group and the Hope for Cuba Foundation as authorized by OFAC, but the idea died because no US disaster assistance funding was made available.

If the US had responded quickly with its unequaled capability, the explosion of the third and fourth tank could have been avoided,  In addition we squandered the opportunity for a positive change of US-Cuba relations with potential consequences internally in both countries and in bilateral relations.  Instead, average Cubans and intellectual and cultural leaders who are known critics of their own government now despair of the US.  (see below)

It is not too late to bring to bear US expertise and traditional generosity.  Cuba faces a massive need for clean up and salvage in Matanzas.  Resolve Marine Group and Hope for Cuba Foundation are revising their proposal to meet the current situation so an easy and credible path for US engagement will soon be on offer. 

Some critics say the uncharacteristic Biden Administration inaction in the face of a neighbor's natural disaster is because it cares more about votes in Florida.  Others claim the US government regards Cuba's loss and additional disruption of electric generating capacity as a good thing because they will add to public discontent and contribute to prospects for regime change.  I cannot accept such cynical interpretations but lack evidence to the contrary.

I am writing to you not only because USAID is a logical source of assistance through the US private sector, but also because of your eloquent, historic and applauded speech to the UN when the US abstained on the embargo vote.   Cuba today is essentially the same as when you spoke.  The encouraging growth of civil society and widening of public debate of that era were reversed in reaction to the Trump Administration's harsh regression in bilateral relations.   

My personal view, based on more than sixty trips to Cuba in the past twenty-five years, is that the wide scale protests of July 11, 2021, were affected by Biden’s continuation of Trump's maximum pressure campaign through denial of remittances and travel.  I also believe the harshness of Cuban repression and subsequent prison sentences are consequences of the unexpected undiminished perceived threat from the US.

I would love to see USAID present in Cuba the way it is in the formerly enemy countries with which I have also worked closely, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia; not to mention Peru where I collaborated with USAID as a Peace Corps volunteer.  For that to happen covert ideology-based democracy programs (which we would not tolerate if Russia, Iran or China tried to carry out in the US) must be replaced by public collaborations for academic, cultural, professional and business exchange.  But that is a longer conversation.  Let's move now on the inescapable humanitarian crisis created by the Matanzas fire.

Sincerely,

John McAuliff

Executive Director

 

PS Your ties to Ireland are more immediate than the several strands of my 19th century immigrant ancestry.  However, a July revisit to the Republic and to Northern Ireland reminded me afresh that Ireland experienced England in ways analogous to Cuba's experience of the US.  Perhaps this parallel might also capture President Biden’s attention.

 

 Appreciation in tweets from Cuban leaders for US technical assistance

Carlos F. de Cossio  @CarlosFdeCossio  

Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs

Agradecemos profunamente condolencias y expresiones de ayuda de diversas organizaciones y personas de EEUU con motivo del siniestro en #Matanzas , incluyendo gob EEUU, que ofreció asesoría técnica, propuesta ya en manos de los especialistas para la debida coordinación. #Cuba

Google translate:  We are very grateful for the condolences and expressions of help from various organizations and people in the United States on the occasion of the incident in #Matanzas, including the United States, which offered technical advice, already in the hands of specialists for proper coordination.

Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez  @DiazCanelB

President

Expresamos profunda gratitud a los gobiernos de México, Venezuela, Rusia, Nicaragua, Argentina y Chile, que con prontitud han ofrecido ayuda material solidaria ante esta compleja situación. También agradecemos ofrecimiento de asesoría técnica por parte de EEUU.

Google translate: We express deep gratitude to the governments of Mexico, Venezuela, Russia, Nicaragua, Argentina and Chile, which have promptly offered material assistance in solidarity in the face of this complex situation. We also appreciate the offer of technical advice from the United States.

Push back that followed the tweet from President Diaz-Canel

Was the author a hard liner from Cuba's Party or security services; or a Russian, Chinese or  Miami exile troll.  All would be unhappy with Washington-Havana rapprochement.

@BettyCOM6 Replying to @DiazCanelB

Que bien el apoyo a Cuba que tanto ha ayudado en el mundo. Pero en el caso de EEUU cuidado con la ayuda si viene de la USAID, no podemos permitir que el principal emisor de subversión en Cuba, sea ahora el Salvador. Si quieren ayudar que quiten cláusulas del bloqueo.

Google translate:  How good the support for Cuba that has helped so much in the world. But in the case of the U.S. beware of help if it comes from USAID, We cannot allow the main issuer of subversion in Cuba to now be our saviour. If they want to help let them remove clauses from the blockade.

Opinion from critics of the government

 La Joven Cuba is an on-line independent publication fostering democratic debate in Cuba.  It is distrusted and attacked by official sources and hard liners in Cuba and by the Florida right wing.  It was sympathetic to protestors in July 2021 and published this editorial about Matanzas.

“United States Absent: Little support from the White House in the face of the disaster in Matanzas”

https://jovencuba.com/estados-unidos-ausente/

 

Ulises Aquino, the outspoken and widely respected creator of Opera de la Calle, asked me to circulate this statement before the fire was extinguished with the help of Mexico and Venezuela:

This is a message to the U.S. Embassy, to the Government of Cuba, Organizations, Artists and all people of good will.

Matanzas suffers, the entire Cuban people, is suffering a voracious fire that threatens to prolong itself due to the impossibility of having the resources and means to extinguish it. As a Cuban citizen, and also as a citizen of the United States, I feel a duty to insistently and with urgency request of the US government that you put aside all differences, and that you urgently collaborate with the Cuban authorities at this difficult time.

It is not a question of procedures now; it is a crusade for life. Let us show that beyond political differences there is a need for a pure space for our peoples to breathe clean air and the right to life.

To the Cuban authorities, please request the collaboration of the United States officially in the solution of this catastrophe that will leave deep traces in our lives.

 

The Referendum on the New Family Code

 

Liberalization versus Democratization in Cuba?

• 8 AUGUST 2022
• JORGE DOMINGUEZ

Debates about the Family Code are open on the Island…and faith accompanies them. 

“Article 197. Marriage.1. Marriage is the voluntarily arranged union of two people with legal capacity to do so, in order to live together, on the basis of affection, love and mutual respect. Family Code Project .

Cuba debates, and is about to decide in a national referendum scheduled for this September 25, the authorization to expand the legal option of a marriage to include two people of the same sex. The Family Code, in force since 1975, authorizes them only between a man and a woman. The text cited above was published in the  Official Gazette of the Republic of Cuba  last January, to allow a broad and public debate, culminating in that national referendum.

There is thus a dilemma between social liberalization and political democratization. On the one hand, the expansion of the option of formal marriage between two people, regardless of their sex, characterizes liberalization processes in this century in many different countries. At the same time, resorting to a national referendum on this issue opens up the option of democratic opportunism, regardless of the underlying issue. Should a Democrat who supports same-sex marriage vote against the project sponsored by the government and the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC), defeating them for the first time since the 1960s, thus sacrificing this liberalization to accelerate democratization?

They are not abstract questions or alien to reality. In public debates at the national level in 2018 and again in 2021, there is organized opposition to the ruling project. It is no longer the same type of Cuban political regime that crushed any hint of opposition for any reason. It continues to be an authoritarian regime in the face of protests against the regime itself, but it already allows a margin of opposition to certain specific policies, as is the case with the Family Code project.

This dilemma, and this same issue in relation to marriage, arose in 2018 during the discussion of the draft Constitution, submitted to a national referendum on February 24, 2019. An initial version proposed marriage between two people, without specifying man or woman. , in order to expand the option of a marriage to two people of the same sex. It turned out to be the idea that aroused the most opposition during the public debate on the draft. The government, to avoid shipwreck, modified it. Article 82 of the 2019 Constitution reads as follows: “[Marriage] is founded on free consent and on the equality of rights, obligations and legal capacity of the spouses. The law determines the form in which it is constituted and its effects. 

It differs from the previous one in 2018 for three reasons. First, the precedent has been set that, faced with evidence of opposition, the government changes course. Second, the outbreak of protests on July 11, 2021, throughout the island, unprecedented in magnitude since the 1960s, and other minor demonstrations before and after, indicate the political vulnerability of the government and the PCC. Third, there is social and economic discontent, generators of the political,  which President Miguel Díaz-Canel himself recognized this past April.: “Now we are joined by problems of water supply with drought, inflation, high prices, endless queues, transportation problems, and all of that is causing stress, discomfort; also the instabilities that we have had in the national electricity service, which have caused the uncomfortable blackouts”. After more than a decade with poor economic results, there is a breeding ground for the opposition.

There is also an element of continuity between the debates during 2018 and 2021: the organized opposition of certain faith communities. It was a reason for the modification of the constitutional article, and it resurfaces strongly in the debate on the Family Code. Examples include the opposition of three religious bodies.

The Conference of Catholic Bishops of Cuba  argued in February 2022  that during "the discussion prior to the approval of the current Constitution of 2019... the majority of Cubans wanted the definition of marriage to be maintained as the union of a man and a woman , as it appears in the current Family Code of 1975”. In addition, they are alarmed by the supposed "gender ideology" that they consider permeates the new Code, as well as the new proposals in relation to "solidarity gestation", "assisted filiation", and the adoption that would be possible for a marriage between people of same sex.

The Baptist Convention of Western Cuba,  in April 2022, had an impact in a  similar way and tone, in this case through a vote of its assembly. Opposes same-sex marriage, assisted pregnancy, personal affirmation of a gender identity, the concept of sexual fluidity, and sex education programs introduced in 2021 by the Ministry of Education.

The Baptist Convention of Eastern Cuba, also through a vote of its assembly,  affirmed : "We do not accept under any circumstances that in order to please the preferences of a minority of citizens, the rights and preferences of the majority are violated and ignored, thus affecting democratic principles that consolidate the unity of a nation”. That "we do not accept under any circumstances" is repeated seven times in this short and angry text, which protests the new measures on gender, sexuality, marriage and education proposed by the government and the PCC.

HAVANA, CUBA: Cubans Wendy Iriepa (right) and Ignacio Estrada (left) wave a gay pride flag as they drive off in a vintage American car after their wedding on August 13, 2011 in Havana, Cuba. It is the first legal transgender wedding in the country. (Photo by Sven Creutzmann/Mambo Photo/Getty Images)

But do they preach in vain? Is the project in danger? Between February and April 2022,  according to their report official to the National Assembly of People's Power, the National Electoral Council convened 79,129 meetings attended by more than six million people; 336,595 people spoke who formulated 434,860 criteria. Of those, affirmed the Council, 61.96 were in favor of the new Code. However, only 39.96 indicated their full support (“I agree”). Another 19.66% expressed their support, but conditioned to changes in the text, while 12.06% opposed the Code itself, 1.62% expressed their doubts and the rest could not specify their position well. The most discussed issues were marriage, adoption, assisted pregnancy, parental responsibility and domestic violence. Even assuming that 62% support is reliable, it implies 38% opposition to a political regime accustomed to demanding “unity”.

If only 40% of the electorate is really in favor, the defeat of the ruling party would be equivalent to an earthquake. That opposition is made up of three very different categories of people. One is those who agree with the Catholic Bishops and the Baptist conventions and, furthermore, respond to their beliefs rather than to possible support, for other reasons, of the government or the PCC. Within these religious ranks there will be those who oppose liberalization in these matters as well as the government and the PCC, perhaps the most consistent in casting their opposition vote in the referendum.

A second opposition category may be those who support the social liberalization that the new Code registers, but do not want to pass up the opportunity to defeat the government and the PCC for the sake of accelerating the democratization processes. These matter more than social liberalization.

And a third category is that of those who generally support the government and the PCC, including some of its members, but who oppose the substantive issues in the new Code. The PCC does not come from a liberal history. In the 1960s, the Military Production Support Units (UMAP) were the punitive destination of thousands of alleged homosexuals. In 1980, acts of repudiation fueled the massive departure of alleged homosexuals from the country. In that decade, the government's initial response to the scourge of AIDS was to lock up any victim of the infection, forcing them to leave their jobs and families, regardless of their personal behavior. It is not surprising, therefore,

The voters of a tacit and unusual coalition remain in favor of him. Some support an authoritarian political regime while being liberal regarding sexuality and gender identity. Others oppose this authoritarian political regime, but value this liberalizing gesture embodied in the new Code.

The debates on the Family Code have already shaped the old political regime, opening its doors to the opposition organized for reasons of faith. But, in addition, they have raised ideological tensions both within the ruling party and within the opposition. This referendum is one more step in the slow and tortuous path of change in Cuba.

uncorrected AI translation; Spanish original

https://www.esglobal.org/liberalizacion-versus-democratizacion-en-cuba/

Rafael Hernandez: Implications and Opportunities from the Matanzas Disaster

 

Environmental disaster and metadiplomacy.   Alternatives for US-Cuba relations?

The obstacle that prevented unilateral and instant assistance from the US cannot be attributed, as in the past, to the regulations of the embargo or any other law, nor to the technical limits of an agreement, but rather to the customary lack of political will.

by Raphael Hernandez

 August 11, 2022

in Cuba-USA

1

Fire at the Matanzas Supertanker Base. Photo: Ricardo López Hevia / Facebook.

US relations with its bordering countries have historically responded to a geopolitical logic. Caught in that logic, for better and for worse, is the question of the environment.

As is known, the US and Mexico share an official program that includes 14 sister cities on each side. The US government associates this program with a contingency plan with these 28 cities, anticipating that they could be affected by "a major release of hazardous substances" ( a major hazardous substance release ). Among those dangerous substances is, of course, oil. Something similar holds with Canada.

The Canadian border is 8,891 km; the Mexican, 3 145 km. Although that of the north is almost triple, everything indicates that problems related to the environment, together with other issues related to national security, accumulate much more on the Mexican side than on the Canadian side.

Any other border to guard? There is one with Cuba, which is not land, but maritime, and which is only 580 km. Despite their smaller size, those 313 nautical mile equivalents are not subject to the same control and cannot be physically sealed to the same degree as land borders. Agreed by a treaty on December 16, 1977, this Cuban maritime border, unlike the aforementioned land borders, is surrounded by a common sea, and is crossed by innumerable naval routes, as well as a current that rises from the south towards the coast of Florida, bordering the island, known as the Gulf Stream.

Maritime limits of the 1977 agreement between Cuba and the United States.

The geopolitical importance of this maritime border determined that the only treaty that emerged from the dialogue and negotiation between the two sides during Obama's short summer was precisely the one that provides for the area of ​​submarine exploitation in the eastern Gulf of Mexico, between the three countries. Marine exploitation that has a first common denominator in terms of the environment and natural resources: oil.

When the United States reacted to the Matanzas catastrophe, it recognized the existence of a precedent that authorizes collaboration in assistance to environmental threats related to oil spills: "United States law authorizes United States entities and organizations to provide assistance and response against disasters in Cuba."

A door for Cuba-United States dialogue?

The most immediate antecedent of mutual understanding of this declaration was one of the last signed between both countries, less than two weeks before Barack Obama left the presidency: the Cooperation Agreement on the Preparation and Response to Pollution caused by oil spills. hydrocarbons and other noxious and potentially dangerous substances in the Gulf of Mexico and the Straits of Florida, dated January 9, 2017.

The official assessment of that agreement by the US was not limited to specific or technical aspects. Although its scope was aimed at "preventing, containing and cleaning up spills of oil and other polluting substances in the sea," it was about "minimizing their adverse effects on public health, safety and the environment," so that its meaning was further: “This bilateral agreement is a recognition of the importance of protecting our marine ecosystems and coastal communities…Establish a mutual framework –including diplomatic, legal and technical aspects– to prevent, prepare for and respond to oil spills in the environment marine is particularly important for neighbors separated by 90 miles.

Although the Cuban side has recognized that that agreement was specific to oil spills in the sea, the underlying issue in that understanding, in terms of the national interest of each country, continues to be the protection of the environment of both, not only of the water.

After all, US environmental policy does not make a substantive difference between maritime and land spills. According to the US Geological Survey (USGS): “an oil spill refers to any uncontrolled release of crude oil, gasoline, fuels or other petroleum derivatives into the environment. Oil spills can contaminate land, air, or water. Although the term oil spill often brings to mind spills in the ocean and coastal waters, such as the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico or the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska, it also refers to spills on land. Spills are incredibly damaging to those species that come into direct contact with the contaminated areas. And depending on the size and scale of an oil spill, recovery time can take anywhere from days to decades."

According to this definition, the United States and all its specialized agencies, which have an incredible wealth of technical resources and specialized equipment, in addition to the incomparable proximity to the disaster area, should have woken up on the Saturday morning in which the tank caught fire, in the mouth of the Bay of Matanzas, responding to their own interests: to prevent contamination of the land, water and air in a surrounding area, preserve the life of the species, and also that of the Cubans directly involved in the disaster.

Once the fire is over, it is not possible to realistically imagine what could happen from now on between the two parties, without first explaining what happened. The obstacle that prevented this unilateral and instant assistance cannot be attributed, as in the past, to the regulations of the embargo or any other law, nor to the technical limits of an agreement, but rather to the customary lack of political will. Against this impediment, no theory of ethnic lobbying or disaster diplomacy can provide an alternative interpretation, with greater explanatory power than what we already knew: relations characterized by hostility and mistrust, where it is difficult to develop any humanitarian diplomacy, because rather they lack humanity. 

The question about the future of relations naturally does not depend on how many humanitarian missions can intertwine the two countries. We already know that, too, since the two sides cooperated to deal with the earthquake in Haiti and the Ebola epidemic in West Africa. Of course you can do it. And???

sister cities

To think about the future, in terms of alternatives, it might be useful to look again at the geopolitics of the Basin and, in particular, at the logic of the border between the US and Cuba, returning, let us say, to the topic of sister cities, among other interlocutors. .

 Why is it that, despite the fact that there are sister cities on both sides, there are no border contingency plans that the US can recognize and consider in its environmental programs? To the south of that border are Havana, Santa Cruz del Norte, Matanzas, Cárdenas; Key West, Naples, Sarasota, Saint Petersburg, Tampa, next to the Everglades protected area, and cities like Miami and Fort Lauderdale, to the north. If we look further, in the interior arch of the Gulf, there are the considerable ports of New Orleans, Mobile, Houston, with which Cuba has had very close historical relations, based on the same geoeconomic logic woven by the neighborhood. 

We already know what happens when a hurricane or an oil spill multiplies catastrophes in the Caribbean basin, whether by land, sea or air. We also know its impact on migratory flows and other national security problems that affect all US borders, land or sea.

Reviewing the subject, however, it turns out that we do have "sister cities," baptized that way on both sides, even without the consecration of the Environmental Protection Agency or the federal government. Las Vegas and Santa Fe (in New Mexico) are twinned with Banes and Holguín; Brunswick (in Maine) with Trinidad; Sancti Spiritus with Philadelphia; Havana with Mobile; Pittsburgh with Matanzas. These subnational relations, recognized as an important dimension of foreign relations in current academic studies of our region, have not been insignificant between Cuba and the United States, including cooperation in recovery from natural disasters.  The classic example is that of the Cuban offer of aid to New Orleans, following Hurricane Katrina, in 2005. Cuba was, along with Australia, Germany, the UK, among the first countries to offer it, and among the very few (Venezuela, Pakistan ) who were not US allies. Although the United States was quite reluctant to accept it in general, which had disastrous results for the victims, it did not prevent the cities of Havana and New Orleans from creating their own cooperation channel, and a mission of Cuban doctors and health personnel from helping in the recuperation. Fourteen years later, this exchange was updated, and was extended to culture, health, education, economy, tourism, agriculture, trade and scientific development, as well as disaster management, climate change and emergency preparedness,

Havana and New Orleans agree to strengthen their cooperation

Is the Cuban system an obstacle so that this exchange that involves subnational actors from both parties can be developed as a major alternative? Does this antagonistic system result in expanding the space of relations between non-governmental actors, such as entrepreneurs, artists, academics, scientists, church representatives, athletes, environmental activists, on both sides?

Taking into account the historical experience of the last ten years, and in the absence of a federal government initiative like the one in 2014-2016, is it more realistic to bet on the humanitarianism of US agencies, with all the ties that often accompany them, or rather to a metadiplomacy that has borne fruit in the past, and that does not exclude Cuban public institutions, but rather turns them into facilitators?

Unless very unexpected things begin to happen in the coming days, when the last flame in Matanzas goes out, the hopes of those who two years ago pinned their eyes on the victory of the Democrats as national salvation will also have turned to ashes. And that will also be a lesson.

https://oncubanews.com/cuba-ee-uu/desastre-ambiental-y-metadiplomacia-alternativas-para-las-relaciones-eeuu-cuba/

Calls for US Assistance   (click here)

 https://cubapeopletopeople.blogspot.com/2022/08/calls-for-us-assistance-to-matanzas-oil.html

Calls for US Assistance to Matanzas Oil Fire

Meeks, Lee, McGovern Issue Statement Regarding Devastating Fires in Matanzas, Cuba

August 10, 2022

Washington, DC – Today, Representatives Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY), Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Barbara Lee (D-CA), Chair of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on State and Foreign Operations, and Jim McGovern (D-MA), Chair of the Rules Committee, issued the following statement urging the Biden Administration to provide U.S. assistance following the devastating fires in Matanzas, Cuba.

“We are deeply concerned about the humanitarian disaster unfolding in Matanzas, Cuba, less than 150 miles from our border. Crises such as this demand an urgent and meaningful response from neighboring countries. 

“Today, we call on the Biden Administration to immediately offer the appropriate assistance to facilitate international response efforts following explosions at the Supertanker Base in Matanzas.  We also urge the Administration to suspend any relevant sanctions in order to expedite such a response, and to deliver much-needed humanitarian relief to the hundreds of Cuban citizens affected by this crisis, as well as the many more facing multiple and cascading crises in Cuba, including shortages of food, energy, and medicine. 

“We fear that the significant recovery efforts needed in Matanzas will push an already resource-strapped Cuba closer to the brink. Now is the time to put politics aside and prioritize humanitarian engagement, environmental protection, and regional cooperation.”

Permalink: https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/2022/8/meeks-lee-mcgovern-issue-statement-regarding-devastating-fires-in-matanzas-cuba

Organizations Call on the US for Immediate Disaster Relief, Enhanced Bilateral Cooperation, Suspension of Sanctions to Support the Cuban People Amid Explosion at Cuba’s Largest Oil Storage Facility

August 9, 2022

Washington, D.C.  —The undersigned organizations call on the U.S. government to expedite technical and direct disaster relief assistance to Cuba, engage in ongoing bilateral dialogue and cooperation, and suspend relevant sanctions to facilitate the response and recovery from the explosions at the Supertanker Base in the Industrial Zone of Matanzas and their after-effects. 

We are saddened to learn of the many injured, missing, and dead as a result of the series of recent explosions at the Matanzas Supertanker Base and subsequent uncontrolled fire at Cuba’s largest oil storage facility. We extend our condolences to the families and communities impacted, extending from Matanzas to Mayabeque, Havana, and beyond.

While we are encouraged to see that the U.S. and Cuban governments are already in conversation about the U.S. providing technical assistance, the humanitarian and medical exceptions in U.S. sanctions are fraught with bureaucratic obstacles that impede the agile and urgent response that is needed. We urge the White House  to call for expedited disaster relief support across all relevant agencies and extend the  necessary emergency humanitarian aid to respond to the incident and its ramifications on the island. As such, the U.S. government should:

• Expand technical assistance and disaster relief resources by mobilizing key U.S. government agencies to deploy on-the-ground support directly or through international agencies, in coordination with the government of Cuba, the international community, and relief agencies.
• Suspend relevant restrictions to facilitate the flow of humanitarian aid to address immediate needs, including access to clean water, food, medical care, transportation, among other areas related to energy. Specifically, the U.S government should restore the EAR license exception (equivalent to a general license) to permit donations to certain Cuban state-run health and humanitarian relief entities when those donations would directly benefit the Cuban people. Humanitarian organizations, religious groups, and private citizens are eager to help, and restoring this exception will enable them to assist more quickly and effectively. 
• Authorize a general license for U.S. private sector firms to provide Cuba with assistance directly related to the current emergency and recovery.
• Build on the immediate disaster relief measures above to provide sustained support for the phases of disaster risk reduction and early recovery.

Cuba's current energy and economic crisis–the island’s worst since the fall of the Soviet Union–has been an ongoing source of great desperation and hardship. Before the explosions at the oil facility, Cubans were already experiencing major problems due to the unstable electric system and lack of fuel, including hours-long outages and scheduled blackouts. This sudden loss of fuel and storage capacity infrastructure caused by the fire is likely to aggravate the energy situation in the island and contribute to outward migration. Facing the possible collapse of Cuba’s electrical grid, the U.S. government could assist in these critical times by authorizing humanitarian exemptions for the export of oil or LPG (Liquified Petroleum Gas) to the island. Furthermore, the 2017 U.S. - Cuba bilateral oil spill preparedness and response agreement could serve as a framework for further disaster relief and response cooperation. 

In the longer term, the U.S. government should take the following specific actions to help break Cuba’s cycle of energy dependency:

• Relaunch the U.S-Cuba Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Working Group to discuss issues of energy security.
• Conduct knowledge-sharing activities compliant with Section 515.591 of the Cuban Assets Control Regulations to help Cuba develop an energy strategy focused on decreasing dependence on imports from other countries.
• Incorporate Cuba into President Biden’s proposed Clean Energy Export and Climate Investment Initiative, a plan to promote American clean energy exports and investments focusing on small island states in the Pacific and Caribbean as well as the newly announced United States-Caribbean Partnership to Address the Climate Crisis 2030. 

Disaster relief cooperation with Cuba has a long-standing precedent, even in the midst of a tense bilateral relationship with the United States. In the short-term, aid is needed but the ramifications of this event will be felt for years and require long-term commitments in disaster relief and climate change mitigation programs to help Cuba recover.

Joint efforts by the United States and Cuba have resulted in some of the most effective responses to natural disasters, demonstrated need on both sides for cooperation to provide healthcare solutions, and create systems to efficiently respond to and mitigate damage from man-made environmental catastrophes. These efforts include informal medical collaboration in Pakistan in 2005 and Haiti in 2010 following deadly earthquakes, Central and West Africa in 2014 during the Ebola epidemic, at the U.S. military base at Guantanamo Bay in 2018 following a wildfire outbreak, and cooperation in 2018 to coordinate pollution responses for offshore oil and hydrocarbon spills.

Last May, the U.S. and Cuba met for the first time in several years to discuss the implementation of the bilateral migration accords. The Biden-Harris administration’s commitment “to pursuing constructive discussions with the Government of Cuba” was an important first step. In light of the terrible situation unfolding in Matanzas and Cuba’s ongoing economic and humanitarian crisis, we urge the Administration to restart broader bilateral diplomatic engagement with Cuba on a range of issues, which will address U.S. national security interests and U.S. policy goals pertaining to disaster relief and climate change mitigation, reduce bilateral tensions, adhere to U.S. regional cooperation commitments, and mitigate future crises. Areas that will bear fruit and already have agreements in place include: Law enforcement and counter-narcotics; Environmental protection; Agriculture; Public Health; and Climate Change.

Sustained support for the Cuban people is especially critical right now as this horrible tragedy will undoubtedly accelerate the severe energy and economic crisis, among other challenges for Cubans that have also been exacerbated by long-standing blanket U.S. sanctions. To reduce further suffering, the U.S. government should suspend the sanctions that disproportionately hurt the Cuban people by expanding remittances channels; loosening regulations on banking and online payment processing; and simplifying end-user verification requirements for the exportation of medical supplies, instruments, and equipment. 

With only 91 miles separating the U.S. and Cuba, the 93 mile-long smoke plume emanating from Matanzas is a visual reminder that the U.S. and Cuba are close neighbors and ongoing dialogue is critical to resolve short-term and long-term needs of the Cuban people as well as to safeguard the interests of the United States.

Alliance of Baptists

Center for Democracy in the Americas (CDA)

Cuba Puentes Inc. 

Cuba Partners Network, Presbyterian Church (USA)

Cuba Study Group

CubaOne Foundation

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)

Florida Council of Churches 

Fund for Reconciliation and Development

Latin America Working Group (LAWG)

Presbyterian Church (USA)

The Ocean Foundation (TOF)

The United Methodist Church — General Board of Church and Society

Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA)

Appeal from Ulises Aquino, 

founder and director of Opera de la Calle

This is a message to the U.S. Embassy, to the Government of Cuba, Organizations, Artists and all people of good will.

Matanzas suffers, the entire Cuban people, is suffering a voracious fire that threatens to prolong itself due to the impossibility of having the resources and means to extinguish it. As a Cuban citizen, and also as a citizen of the United States, I feel a duty to insistently and with urgency request of the US government that you put aside all differences, and that you urgently collaborate with the Cuban authorities at this difficult time.

It is not a question of procedures now; it is a crusade for life. Let us show that beyond political differences there is a need for a pure space for our peoples to breathe clean air and the right to life.

To the Cuban authorities, please request the collaboration of the United States officially in the solution of this catastrophe that will leave deep traces in our lives.


Original


Este es un mensaje a la Embajada de los Estados Unidos. Al Gobierno, las Organizaciones, a los Artistas y a todas las personas de buena voluntad. Matanzas sufre, el pueblo cubano entero, esta sufriendo un voraz incendio que amenaza con prolongarse ante la imposibilidad de contar con los recursos y medios para extinguirlo. Como ciudadano Cubano, y ciudadano de los Estados Unidos, siento el deber de solicitar encarecidamente y con extrema urgencia que dejen a un lado todas las diferencias, y que con urgencia colaboren con las autoridades cubanas en este duro momento para Cuba. No se trata ahora de procedimientos, se trata de una cruzada en favor de la vida. Demostemos que más allá de diferencias políticas existe la necesidad de un espacio puro para que nuestros pueblos respiren aire limpio y el derecho a la vida. A las autoridades Cubanas, que por favor solicite la colaboración de Estados Unidos oficialmente en la solución de este siniestro que dejará profundas huellas en nuestras vidas.

La Joven Cuba editorial

United States Absent

Little support from the White House in the face of the disaster in Matanzas

https://jovencuba.com/estados-unidos-ausente/