by Pete Norstrum,
Miami
Clinton's second
thoughts on Helms-Burton.
"Unable to satisfy domestic demands for stronger policies
against Cuba, and facing biting criticism from major trading partners,
US President Bill Clinton pospones implementing key segments of
the "Helm-Burton Law." "
When President Bill Clinton first announced he would sign the Helms-Burton bill to allow US citizens to sue Cuban authorities and foreigners using property seized during Fidel Castro's 1956 revolution, pro-sanction supporters thought the move marked the beginning of the end for Castro.
Now, they're not so sure.
Like many other U.S. strategies intended to depose the western hemisphere's longest serving leader, the reality is quite different, as even the President now seems reluctant to follow through and enforce the law.
The Organization of American States (OAS) condemned the Helms-Burton
Law in a June resolution which the United States later denounced
as "an act of diplomatic cowardice." Mexico and Canada,
U.S. partners in the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA,)
have already drafted "antidote" legislation aimed at
combating the bill. The European Union has also cried foul.
Under increasing international pressure, Clinton delayed introducing
the law for six months. This was again extended for another six
months in December.
The bill puts into law, 37-years of executive orders relating
to U.S. relations with Cuba, including the longstanding trade
embargo.
It would allow some former Cubans, now naturalized U.S. citizens,
to file suit in federal courts against anyone seeking to purchase
property which had been confiscated from them by the Cuban government
during Fidel Castro's 37-year rule.
In order to qualify, the property must have been valued at
US$50,000 or more when confiscated. The new law allows Clinton,
who opposed this provision, to suspend it for periods of six months.
Also, under the bill, any person associated with a company deemed
to be "trafficking" in confiscated Cuban property would
be barred from entry into the United States.
Among other things, it also requires the State Department to deny visas to executives of such companies and their families Ñ a punishment which has already been imposed on a Mexican telecommunications company, Grupo Domos, and a Canadian mining concern, Sherritt International. Together, the two confiscated property provisions are aimed at discouraging foreign investors from purchasing such property from the cash-strapped Castro government.
Helms called the bill "a slap in the face to a tyrant, who has been allowed to do things at will for a quarter of a century or more.' Burton predicted that "in a few short years, there will be freedom, democracy and human rights in Cuba, and we'll all go down there and have a good time.'
The Clinton administration had resisted the bill for months before the two planes, associated with Miami-based Cuban exile group, Brothers to the Rescue, were shot down Feb. 24. Three of the fliers were naturalized U.S. citizens; the fourth was a permanent U.S. resident.
After the incident, which Havana claims occurred when the planes entered Cuban air space, but which the United States says occurred over international waters, Clinton withdrew his opposition and paved the way for a speedy congressional passage.
Despite being in limbo at the White House, the law has had some impact. Latin American cement manufacturer, Cemex, scrapped plans to extend their operations in Cuba, selling off much of its investment, while American soft drink giants Coca Cola and Pepsi, join US brand-name clothing manufacturers who have publicly stated their interest in the Cuban market but are forced to look on at the sidelines.
However, Alfredo G. Duran, Miami-based president of the Cuban Committee for Democracy, said the Helms-Burton bill would do nothing to remove Castro from power and would hurt American interests. Duran said the bill "would never have passed if 1996 was not an election year."
"All this bill does is move America further away from Cuba, and give Castro the freedom to continue his pro-communist policies. American firms will be left out of Cuba's development while the rest of the world is given a first pick, as well as time, to establish themselves in the Cuban market."
The fact that Clinton postponed the introduction of the most
effective component of the law, is proof that he never intended
to enforce it and it was simply a clever attempt the gain political
support in South Florida - "and the plan worked," he
added.
The Cuban-American community in South Florida has historically
supported Republican candidates who were seen more as anti-communists
than Democrats.
The law establishes criteria for lifting the embargo against
Cuba during a transitional period towards democracy and specifies
what help the U.S. could provide to a fledgling democratic government.
It would penalize any former Soviet state that aids Cuba's intelligence
gathering efforts or its effort to complete its nuclear power
plant near Cienfuegos, in south-central Cuba, by withholding aid.
Both American and Cuban officials agree that Helms-Burton has
further complicated an already messy situation. It is unclear
how claimants can even find out how their property is being used.
Most Americans are prohibited by U.S. law from visiting Cuba,
and U.S. officials based at the U.S. Interest Section are not
allowed to leave Havana without giving the Cuban government five
days' advance notice.
"At the moment, the enforcement responsibility lies with
the Department of State, in Washington," said one U.S. official,
of Helms-Burton.
If or when the United States and Cuba re-establish relations,
property settlement is going to be "an absolutely critical
issue," the official said. "It's incredibly complex
and incredibly urgent."
Helms-Burton threatens to make the issue even more difficult. It stipulates that Cubans naturalized as U.S. citizens can file property claims beginning in 1998. This could add thousands of cases to what is already the largest number of certified property claims in US history against a foreign government.
The total value of the claims ranging from the Cuban Electric Company's US$267.6 million claim, to several US$2 claims on single shares of stock stands at US$5.6 billion, including interest. Disputed properties include vast sugar estates and homes of exiled Cubans long inhabited by other families.
The Cuban government, meanwhile, counters that it is entitled
to economic damages from the United States for the economic embargo,
which Cubans estimate has cost the country $41 billion.
"When the moment arrives, we have to put both things on the
table," said Olga Miranda, a former Cuban Foreign Ministry
official, who is regarded as the country's leading specialist
on the nationalization issue. "We're not in the 1960's anymore.
We're here in 1996, and this is reality."
So much time has passed, that even large claims like Cuban
Electric Co. and the Bank of Boston, which had its regional headquarters
in Havana, have almost disappeared from corporate agendas.
Many observers say that despite the recent escalation of tensions
over property, when the time comes, the claims will be negotiated
as part of a transition to a democratic government in Cuba.
To smoothen the edges of the opposition of its trading partners, Clinton dispatched a top Commerce Department official, Stuart Eizenstat, on a 12 nation campaign to muster international support for the new law.
On his first foreign diplomatic shuttle, he was thrown with
eggs in Mexico... and things haven't gotten much better.
Eizenstat's experience has raised concerns that the law could
provoke a trade war or at least undercut popular support in the
United States for the trade agreement that created the World Trade
Organization.
While the law's supporters argue that it does not seek to curb
foreign trade with Cuba, but simply targets those companies exploiting
confiscated resources, its critics in Mexico, Canada and Europe
have called it an "extra-territorial" effort by the
United States to impose its foreign policy on others. On the eve
of Eizenstat's visit to Mexico, President Ernesto Zedillo said
it was "simply a violation of international law."
Given the anger from America's allies, it was clear that Eizenstat's
mission would see little success. Most of his work has involved
bearing the brunt of the outrage over the bill not just from the
allies, but from Cuban-American groups angered that the law's
sharpest bite had been postponed. It was a measure of the domestic
politics involved that the first part of Eizenstat's mission did
not take him abroad, but rather to Florida and New Jersey.
Eizenstat acknowledged that he was unlikely to persuade the
trading partners to accept the law, nor a similar one that imposes
sanctions on foreign companies that invest in Libya and Iran.
Instead, he said his strategy was to rally support for other steps
that nations could take to increase pressure on Castro's government.
On his diplomatic trips, he has touted a series of proposals for
nations to use their embassies to promote human rights, for companies
that operate in Cuba to adopt "best business practices"
like fair wages, and for non-governmental organizations to promote
reforms in the Cuba's media, penal system and judiciary.
In an interview at his office at the Commerce Department, Washington, DC, Eizenstat said these "modest steps" could speed a transition to democracy in Cuba and thus preclude the need for the Helms-Burton law. While he insisted that the President would not try to reverse the law, he suggested America's trading partners could persuade him to suspend the punitive measures again.
He preferred not to characterize the strategy as neither a
carrot nor a stick.
"The issue is whether they can, on their own, develop concrete
and specific measures to which the President can point."
"The issue of democracy in Cuba," he said, "would
not have been put on the radar screen if not for Helms-Burton."
For their part, the trading partners remain determined, warily hopeful that Clinton will somehow get around the law once Election Day passes and, as one diplomat put it, the "silly season" ends.
Executive Time "Online" also has a printed version which is available throughout the Caribbean and some selected North American cities.
