UN General Assembly supports Cuba

The US blockade is condemned once again

Nov 03, 2023

By a vote of 187-2, with one abstention, the General Assembly of the United Nations on November 2, 2023, voted in favor of the Cuban resolution, “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed by the United States of America against Cuba.” The USA and Israel voted against the resolution, and Ukraine abstained. The UN body has condemned since 1992 the U.S. unilateral blockade, imposed for more than six decades against the Caribbean Island nation.

The Cuban report against the blockade

The Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs submitted a “Report against the blockade” in support of the resolution. The report covers the damage caused by the U.S. policy during the period between March 1, 2022, and February 28, 2023. It notes that the period was characterized by the continuous and deliberate application of measures of extreme pressure installed by the government of Donald Trump, and further noting that the government of Joseph Biden has been incapable of formulating its own policy toward Cuba, as was promised in the 2020 platform of the Democratic Party.

The report names the most severe characteristics of the hostile policy during the period: the allowance of demands before U.S. courts with respect to properties nationalized by the Cuban Revolutionary Government, through application of Title III of the 1996 Helms-Burton Law; the inclusion of Cuba on a list of states that supposedly sponsor terrorism, an arbitrary inclusion that lacks an empirical basis; the persecution of financial and commercial transactions with Cuba by banks and companies in third countries, in violation of the sovereignty of other nations; the intimidation of companies that supply fuel to Cuba; attempts to frustrate the recovery of the Cuban tourist sector from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic; and the campaign to discredit Cuban programs of medical cooperation with other countries.

The report observes that as a result of the policy, Cuba has been deprived of income indispensable for the purchase of food, supplies, equipment, parts, technologies, and software, in the context of a situation of deprivation and anxiety that define the daily life of the Cuban people. The real effects are seen in the deterioration of the socioeconomic indicators of the country.

In addition, there has been a campaign against Cuba in the social media, using sophisticated programs, which are designed to feed discontent by constructing a false reality of the country, creating a perception that institutions of the state are incapable of responding to the challenges that the nation confronts due to the blockade of its economy.

The report estimates that during the period, the blockade caused damage to the Cuban economy in the amount of US $4,867,000,000. This estimation takes into account various factors: the impact of the intensification of the blockade on Cuban exports, especially tourism; the ferocious persecution of banking-financial operations; the costs of the geographic relocation of commerce; and increased costs of production and services due to the blocking of access to advanced technologies.

The report declares that “no other people has had to assume a social project of development in similar conditions, with such prolonged and systematic hostility by the greatest power that humanity has known.”

The report includes a section on the consequences of the reinsertion of Cuba on the list of states that sponsor terrorism by the U.S. Department of State on January 11, 2021, a few days prior to Donald Trump’s departure from the White House, using arguments that were inconsistent and without evidence. The Biden Administration has maintained Cuba on said list, with full knowledge that the pretexts were dishonest. In this regard, the report maintains:

Inclusion on the list of state sponsors of terrorism has severe consequences for the economy of the country, mainly in the banking/financial sector. It reinforces the deterring and intimidating effects with respect to third parties in their commercial relations with Cuba. Its impact is not only detrimental to trade, but also for the possibilities of obtaining credits and making payments for goods and supplies essential for the development of the country.
Due to the designation as a State that supposedly sponsors terrorism, numerous companies and financial institutions around the world refused to operate with Cuba during the period, out of fear of reprisals by the U.S. government, specifically the Department of the Treasury.
Dozens of banks suspended their operations with the country, including transfers for the purchase of food, medicines, fuels, materials, parts and other goods. Because of this, Cuba had to assume elevated additional costs to acquire supplies of priority.

The report notes that 73% of the budget of the Cuban state in 2022 was dedicated to the needs of the population, including health, education, and social security. It provided estimates of the costs of the blockade in these various sectors, including health, food, education, sport, and culture. It observed that the blockade has a significant impact on the economic development of the country, by virtue of its impact on tourism, biotechnology, the pharmaceutical industry, information and communications, transportation, and energy.

The report also summarizes the opposition to the blockade within the United States and in the international community. It mentioned in this regard known U.S. intellectuals and activists as well as organizations of U.S. civil society. It referred to organizations of solidarity with Cuba throughout the world, as well as declarations of condemnation of the blockade by regional organizations such as CELAC, ALBA-TCP, CARICOM, and the African Union.

The world stands with Cuba

On November 1 and 2, forty-four speakers took the podium to address the question of the U.S. embargo. They stressed the harmful long-lasting consequences of the embargo on Cuba. Twenty-one of them explicitly referred to the inclusion of Cuba on the list of countries that sponsor terrorism. Many speakers noted that the UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly urged the United States to lift the blockade for more than thirty years.

The representative from Singapore, speaking on behalf of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), noted that 80% of the Cuban population have lived their entire lives under the impact of the blockade. From March 1, 2022, to February 28, 2023, the blockade cost Cuba an estimated $4.87 billion in losses.

The representative of Mauritania, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), stressed the impact of the inclusion of Cuba in the list of countries allegedly sponsoring terrorism, making banking and financial operations extremely difficult. The U.S. policy even affects Cuba’s capacity to obtain medicine and food.

The representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), expressed opposition to measures that are contrary to international law, such as the Helms-Burton Act and the persecution of international financial transactions. She also declared that CELAC is opposed to the unjust inclusion of Cuba on the list of State sponsors of terrorism, and she called upon the U.S. government to comply with the numerous resolutions of the General Assembly and to end its policy toward Cuba. She also observed that the U.S. policy is opposed to the desire of the peoples of the region for peace.

The representative of El Salvador, speaking on behalf of the System of Central American Integration, emphasized that the blockade makes it difficult for Cuban health authorities to acquire medical supplies and equipment. She added that the arbitrary and unjust inclusion of Cuba on the list of countries that sponsor terrorism has lacerated the Cuban economy. She characterized the U.S. policy as inhumane, unjust, and anachronistic; and in violation of the principles of the UN Charter, such as the right of nations to sovereignty and to non-interference in their internal affairs. She declared that “from Cuba, we have known only solidarity, warmth, and humanism.” She expressed regret that the multidimensional world crisis has not stimulated better relations; she maintained that the lifting of the blockade is the necessary first step in rapprochement between the United States and Cuba.

The delegate from Uganda, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, called for the removal of Cuba from the list of countries that allegedly sponsor terrorism, which has created obstacles for Cuban international banking operations, and therefore for the attainment of sustainable development goals. He observed that Cuba has contributed in a positive manner to the development of other nations and has lent collaboration to underdeveloped countries. “Cuba is an active member of South-South cooperation, and it has contributed to the development of the countries of the Third World.” He expressed lament that the U.S. policy toward Cuba has been maintained for six decades, despite changes in the political parties that occupy the White House.

The delegate of Saint Lucia, speaking on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), declared that the U.S. embargo is contrary to the UN Charter and to the current movement of the international community toward multilateralism and regional integration and cooperation. She declared that CARICOM is concerned with the impact of the measure on the forms of subsistence of the Cuban people. She rejected the inclusion of Cuba on the list of states that sponsor terrorism, since it has no basis. She observed that Cuba has supported other nations with medical personnel and medicines, and that Cuba has been an enduring model of South-South cooperation. “CARICOM and Cuba share a commitment to the development of the Caribbean. Cuba was the first country to send health personnel in the region during the pandemic. Cuba has provided scholarships for the development of human resources in the region.”

The representative of Eritrea, speaking on behalf of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, observed that the General Assembly has consistently and overwhelmingly demanded the end of the blockade against Cuba. He declared that the continued existence of the blockade is a shame on the moral authority of the United Nations. He noted that the full application of Title III of the Helms-Burton Law, beginning in May 2019, has made it possible for individuals to file lawsuits in U.S. courts against international companies operating in Cuba that are utilizing properties that were nationalized by the Cuban government.

The representative of Azerbaijan, speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, observed that the General Assembly has previously approved resolutions presented by Cuba demanding the end of the blockade, and therefore the Non-Aligned Movement considers the U.S. policy to be illegal. The policy is contrary to norms and principles of international relations, and it ought to be stopped. The persecution of Cuban financial transactions in third countries has cost thousands of millions of dollars in losses. He observed that the denial of Cuba to access to markets, international aid, and technology transfers causes serious damage to Cuban socioeconomic development. The embargo is the main obstacle to Cuba’s continuing efforts toward sustainable development.

The representative of Zambia, speaking on behalf of the African Group, stated that the African continent has been consistently concerned with the Cuban situation, inasmuch as Cuba has been a responsible member of the international community, making numerous positives contributions to Africa and many other nations. The African Group will continue to reaffirm full support for the Cuban resolution, as the General Assembly has done for thirty years.

The representative of China criticized the USA and a few Western countries for their “unilateralism, protectionism, and bullying.” The application of unilateral measures against Cuba, he observed, violates the UN Charter and it undermines the international consensus for sustainable development and peace. The U.S. policy “must be stopped immediately,” he declared.

The representative of the Russian Federation expressed his delegation’s resolute protest against the U.S. policy, as a violation of the UN Charter and the fundamental principles of international law. He characterized the U.S. imposition of unilateral, illegal sanctions as openly neocolonial, based in a systematic effort to persecute and suppress undesirable regimes around the world. The Cuban blockade is the true antithesis of sustainable development.

Bruno Rodríguez addresses the General Assembly

Following the interventions by representatives of forty-four governments and international organizations, Cuban Minister of Foreign Affairs Bruno Rodríguez took the podium. Selections from his discourse follow.

The blockade violates the right to life, health, education and well-being of all Cubans.
Our families feel it through shortages in stores, long queues, excessive prices or devalued wages.
The government is making great efforts to guarantee the regulated family food basket, which is not enough to satisfy all needs, but it attends to the needs of all families, without exception, at extraordinarily subsidized prices.
For this year, the family food basket program requires more than 1.6 billion dollars. With only a third of the amount of the losses caused by the blockade between March 2022 and February 2023, Cuba would have been able to comfortably cover these expenses.
The blockade deprives the national industry of financing for the acquisition of agricultural machinery, animal feed, spare parts and pieces for equipment and industry, and other supplies necessary for food production, which is seriously affected.
…..
For more than six decades, Cuba has resisted a ruthless economic, commercial and financial blockade. More than 80% of our current population has only known a blockaded Cuba.
The United States government has not ceased in its efforts to deprive our country of indispensable financial income, to depress the standard of living of the population, to impose continuous shortages of food, medicine and other basic supplies, and to provoke economic collapse.
With viciousness and surgical precision, the most sensitive sectors of the economy are attacked, deliberately seeking to inflict as much damage as possible on Cuban families.
The blockade is an act of economic warfare in peacetime, aimed at nullifying the government's ability to meet the needs of the population. It seeks to create a situation of ungovernability and to destroy the constitutional order.
…..
The U.S. conduct is absolutely one-sided and unjustified. There is not a single measure or action by our country to harm the United States, to harm its powerful economic sector or its commercial activity. There is no act by Cuba that threatens the independence of the United States or its national security, violates its sovereign rights, interferes in its internal affairs, or affects the well-being of its citizens.
It is neither legal nor ethical for the government of a world power to subject a small nation, for decades, to an incessant economic war in order to impose an alien political system and appropriate its resources. It is unacceptable to deprive an entire people of the right to peace, self-determination, development and human progress.
The Cuban people are not the only ones suffering the terrible consequences of an illegal, cruel and inhumane policy. Many others in the world are also victims of these injustices, of the "philosophy of dispossession" that leads to the "philosophy of war," as the Commander in Chief, Fidel Castro Ruz, denounced from this podium in 1960.
The United States is reinforcing its mechanisms of siege against Cuba in the banking-financial sector. It maintains the prohibition of the use of the dollar, and it is incessant and obsessive in the persecution of financial transactions in other currencies with respect to trade and investment.
The persecution has been further reinforced by the arbitrary inclusion of our country in the State Department's unilateral list of countries allegedly sponsoring terrorism.
The U.S. government lies and does enormous damage to international efforts to combat terrorism when it accuses Cuba without any basis. There is not a single valid and reasonable argument for Cuba's permanence on that spurious list. Such an action is inadmissible, directed against a nation that is a victim of terrorism, which even today suffers the impunity of instigation to violence and terrorist acts from U.S. territory; a nation whose conduct of firm rejection and persecution of terrorism in all its forms and manifestations is beyond reproach and is recognized.
.....
The tightening of the economic siege has been accompanied by a sustained media and communication campaign against Cuba.
New information technologies and other digital platforms are employed to try to capitalize on the shortcomings caused by the blockade and project an absolutely false image of Cuban reality, destabilizing and discrediting the country.
The media crusade, mainly from toxic platforms financed and based in U.S. territory, is aimed at fomenting unrest, creating the perception of an internal political crisis, discrediting government institutions and undermining the enormous efforts that the country is making to overcome the challenges of a blockaded economy.
It is an unconventional, ideological war, which the USA openly and notoriously conducts, to which the U.S. government dedicates millions of dollars from its federal government budget, with amounts hidden from public view.
Their plan is perverse and incompatible with democracy, freedom and right to information that they supposedly advocate.
The current U.S. government is continuing the inhumane policy established during the presidency of Donald Trump, and, paradoxically, has made its own. In practice, it has maintained intact and applies with all severity the laws and regulations that give support and effect to this policy, including the most hostile and inhumane. The blockade, which has been intensified in the extreme, continues to be the central element that defines the policy of the United States towards Cuba.
….
More than three decades have passed since this Assembly began to demand, every year, the end of the blockade against Cuba. However, the expressed will of the international community is disrespected and ignored by the government of the greatest economic, financial and military power.
It is neither permissible nor acceptable that successive resolutions of this forum, the most democratic and representative of the United Nations, are ignored with impunity.
…..
The colossal challenges do not deter us. The Cuban people will not cease in their efforts to honor and defend our free and sovereign homeland.
We will continue our transformative and revolutionary effort, searching for ways out of the siege imposed on us by U.S. imperialism and ways to advance toward prosperity with social justice, sustaining and expanding social programs.
…..
No other people has had to undertake a development project under such conditions, under such systematic and prolonged aggression by a superpower.
But Cuba will continue to renew itself, in the construction of a sovereign, independent, socialist, democratic, prosperous and sustainable nation.
Distinguished Delegates,
By exercising your vote shortly, you will not only be deciding on a matter of vital interest to Cuba and to every Cuban family. Your vote in favor of the draft resolution will also be a statement in support of reason and justice, and an act of support for the Charter of the United Nations and international law.

Toward a new framing of the issue

Cuba first presented its resolution against the U.S. blockade, always with the same language, to the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1992. In that year, the vote was 59 in favor, 3 against, and 71 abstentions. Over the next twenty years, the number of no votes remained at two or three, while the number of abstentions decreased each year, such that by 2003 there were 179 votes in favor of the resolution. From 2003 to the present, the number of affirmative votes has held steady in the range of 179 to 191 votes. This constitutes a significant achievement for Cuban diplomacy, taking into account the fact that many countries voting against U.S. policy with respect to Cuba have significant commercial relations with and an economic dependency on the USA. The Cuban diplomatic appeal has been based on the principled argument that a long-standing economic blockade in the absence of a declared war violates the UN Charter and international law, and its consequences are in violation of the human rights of the Cuban people.

In 2016, during the Obama opening, no nation voted against the resolution, as the USA abstained. Obama had put forth the possibility of ending the blockade. He restored diplomatic relations with Cuba, removed Cuba from the list of states that sponsor terrorism, and softened some of the commercial and travel restrictions. But in his visit to Cuba, he made clear that the USA continued to have an imperialist agenda with respect to Cuba. His new policy was based on recognition that the blockade had failed to bring down the Cuban Revolution, so he was pursuing a different imperialist strategy, involving commercial support for the Cuban petty bourgeoisie, so that it would expand and eventually become the social base of an internal political opposition in Cuba. The blockade remained intact under Obama, and it was subsequently intensified by Trump and Biden.

However, in spite of the votes of the nations of the world against U.S. policy, the USA continues with the blockade. The United States has been bent on an aggressive imperialist foreign policy, in an economic form with the imposition of neoliberal policies on the world beginning in 1980; in the form of military aggression in the Middle East after 2001; and through unconventional wars against various targeted nations since 2015. The idea of aggressive imperialism in foreign policy has captured both major political parties. An Obama-like softening of policy toward Cuba is possible, taking into account the worldwide clamor against U.S. policy, but a softening likely would be accompanied by a continued imperialist intention with respect to Cuba and with respect to the nations of the Global South and the East. It is each day more evident that the American power elite is responding to U.S. economic decline through increasing economic, military, and ideological aggression against the nations and peoples of the world.

In this context, the Cuban foreign policy strategy is to deepen cooperation and mutually beneficial relations with China, Russia, and the nations of the Third World, constructing in practice on a step-by-step basis an alternative world order, thereby increasingly placing the United States in a situation in which its interests are increasingly served by abandoning imperialist policies and economic sanctions and participating, on the basis of its still strong economy, in the development of mutually beneficial trade among nations.

In this process of step-by-step construction of an alternative world order, the annual UN General Assembly vote functions as a non-binding worldwide referendum, demonstrating that the world rejects the U.S. policy toward Cuba. And it provides a channel for reaffirming the Cuban belief, shared by China and leading Third World governments, that conflicts should be resolved through the UN system, as the only practical alternative to economic and military wars by all against all. Cuba actively participates in various UN institutions, such as the Human Rights Council, the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), and G77.

In this worldwide political context, people’s organizations in the United States could play a more dynamic role. They ought to follow the lead of the Third World plus China and put forth a proposal for mutually beneficial trade and cooperation with all the nations of the world, seeking to liberate the American nation as well as humanity from the economic and cultural constraints of neocolonialism. With respect to Cuba, a people’s proposal must do more than point out that the blockade violates international law and the human rights of the Cuban people. It must explain to the people, in the first place, the rationality of the blockade in the context of the neocolonial world-system, which is designed to ensure U.S. and Western control over the natural resources of the world. It must make clear that in a neocolonial world-system, countries that seek sovereignty are a fundamental threat, because they are committed to the principle, unacceptable for neocolonialism, that they have the right to control their own natural resources in order to promote the development of their national economies in accordance with a sovereign socioeconomic plan.

The people’s proposal next has to explain that neocolonialism and imperialism are inconsistent with the founding principles of the American Republic and its promise of democracy for all. Here the defenders of the people must proceed with political savvy. Those among the people who are influenced by right-wing ideologies may be the most receptive to this message, because they are the ones who tend to care about the American Republic and its founding principles. U.S. activists, however, lacking political intelligence, often use a semi-classic Marxist approach of invoking “workers and oppressed peoples,” which constitutes an implicit but discernible devaluing of rural and small-town America as well as the “white” middle class. You cannot persuade people to join your project if you begin by expressing your view of their unimportance. In calling the American people to an anti-imperialist project, you need to call them as such, as “the people.”

Next, the people’s proposal has to explain to the people the long-term destructiveness of the long legacy of imperialist policies, beginning with U.S. economic and political penetration of Latin America and the Caribbean in the first half of the twentieth century, and continuing with the Cold War from 1946 to 1989, the imposition of neoliberal economic policies after 1980, the endless wars since 2001, and the unconventional wars since 2015. Leftist activists tend to have this part of the message right, to some extent. But they present it without political intelligence. They come across as bashing and disrespecting their own nation and of having no appreciation of historic and contemporary democratic tendencies in the nation. It would be more intelligent to focus their attack on the post-1946 power elite, which ought to be accused of betraying the nation and its historic proclamation of democratic principles, first articulated as a promise and evolving toward greater fulfillment.

Next, the people’s proposal ought to stress the benefits of cooperation with the nations of the world, and the possible benefits of joining in the current construction of an alternative, more just world order by the nations of the Third World plus China. Both leftist activists and right-wing pundits tend to not see this dimension, because as a nation, we tend not to observe what is going on in the Third World; so that we tend not to appreciate that the nations of the world are responding to the multidimensional crisis of the world-system by working to construct mutually beneficial trade among all nations, based in respect for the sovereignty of all nations, including those with small and/or weak economies and armies, and including the once-great world powers, insofar as they can conduct themselves as responsible world citizens.

Next, the people’s proposal has to explain the dynamics of the Cuban political system, delegitimating the claim that Cuba is authoritarian or violates human rights. It has to explain that Cuba has abolished political parties in the Western parliamentary sense, transferring their functions to new structures, including mass organizations and people’s assemblies. It has to explain that Cuba has minimal anti-governmental civil society and street demonstrations, because the Cuban political system channels the expression and the mobilization of political will toward mass organizations and people’s assemblies. It has to explain that the Cuban Revolution has developed a system of people’s democracy, which can be appreciated as possibly more advanced than representative democracy.

So, it is not just a question of a people’s campaign to end the blockade of Cuba, but a people’s proposal for building an alternative relation with Cuba based in mutual respect and cooperation, which would be based in an anti-imperialist reformulation of U.S. foreign policy.

If the U.S. government were to move in this direction, it would be reciprocated by the Cuban Revolutionary Government, which has from the beginning proposed mutual respect and mutually beneficial cooperation, in spite of differences in the political-economic systems of the two nations, rooted in different histories and different cultures. Such a move also would be well received by the Cuban people, who view good relations with the American people as the most natural thing in the world.

Cuba should be seen not as a threat to American democracy, but as a potential partner in the common construction by humanity of the promise of democracy, which, as all the world knows and appreciates, was given an early and politically significant proclamation in the American Declaration of Independence of 1776.

Knowledge, ideology, and real socialism in our times

Discussion about this post