Life Support for Castro: New Commission on Cuba,
Paris Club ‘Rescheduling’ of Havana’s Defaulted Debt

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

(Washington, D.C.): With the mid-term election an accomplished fact, the “usual suspects”
are
resuming one of the hardiest perennials of what passes for President Clinton’s foreign policy
agenda: the effort to normalize relations with communist Cuba.

In recent days, proponents of ending the economic embargo against Fidel Castro’s regime
have
opened a two-front campaign:

  • A Stacked-Deck ‘Commission’: One track involves the creation of a
    so-called National
    Bipartisan Commission on Cuba. In keeping with the increasingly common practice of fobbing
    intractable public policy problems off onto independent, “bipartisan” entities, its champions
    claim that such a Commission would be able to provide an objective assessment of the
    effectiveness of America’s present policy toward Cuba and offer suggestions for altering it
    where necessary.

    All other things being equal, despite the likely inclusion of token representation from
    Cuban-Americans and others opposed to any initiative that would ease the isolation of
    and provide economic and/or political life-support to the Cuban dictatorship, this
    Commission’s membership will mostly be comprised of advocates for
    easing/eliminating the embargo.

  • Debt-Relief for Castro: The Paris Club is reportedly considering
    rescheduling more than $10
    billion in Cuban hard currency debt. According to a 17 November Financial Times
    article
    entitled “Cuba Edges Toward Paris Club Accord,” momentum is building to overlook Cuba’s
    non-payment over more than a decade of some $10-14 billion owed to Western governments
    and private firms (i.e. payments ceased in 1986) and to in effect make Havana’s debt profile
    current.

    The FT reports that, during a September visit to Paris, Cuban Vice-President
    Carlos
    Lage met with Paris Club Chairman Frances Mayer, who actively supported this
    initiative. Cuba’s largest Western creditors are France, Argentina, Japan, Spain
    and Belgium
    with almost 60% of Cuba’s total hard currency debt owed to Western
    governments. An ad hoc committee may be configured, as soon as next month, to
    speed this process. (Since Cuba is not an IMF member and the U.S. has the power to
    block any multilateral rescheduling in the Paris Club. Accordingly, Havana has been
    pursuing bilateral debt reschedulings. Japan and Italy have already agreed to this
    strategy designed to circumvent American opposition in the unlikely event it is
    forthcoming.)

A Natty Little Problem: Cuba Still Represents a Clear if
Asymmetric
Threat

American advocates of normalization usually contend that Cuba no longer poses any threat to
the
United States and that the U.S. embargo is, therefore, basically an obsolete and harmful relic of
the Cold War. Unfortunately, this view — as is typically true of the philosophy of trade uber
alles

— ignores the abiding, menacing character of the Castro regime. This is all the more remarkable
given the emphasis Secretary of Defense William Cohen (among other Clinton Administration
officials) have placed on asymmetric threats — the very sorts of threats Cuba
continues to pose to
American citizens and interests.(1) These include the
following:

    Information and Intelligence Warfare

Thanks to the vast signal intelligence facilities operated near Lourdes, Cuba by Havana’s
and Moscow’s intelligence services — facilities that permit the wholesale collection of
sensitive
U.S. military, diplomatic and commercial data and the invasion of millions of Americans’
privacy
— the Cuban regime has the capability to conduct sustained and systematic
Information
Warfare (IW) against the United States.

A stunning example of the potentially devastating consequences of this capability was recently
provided by former GRU Colonel Stanislav Lunev. As one of the most senior
Soviet/Russian
military intelligence officials to come to this country, Lunev revealed that in 1990 the Soviet
Union acquired America’s most sensitive Desert Storm battle plans, including General Norman
Schwartzkopf’s famed “Hail Mary” flanking maneuver, prior to the launch of the U.S. ground war
in the Persian Gulf. Moscow’s penetration of such closely-guarded American military planning —
via its Cuban ally — may have jeopardized the lives of literally thousands of U.S. troops in the
event the intelligence had been forwarded to Saddam Hussein.

What is more, Russia may have recently learned in the same way about the
particulars of
U.S. plans to strike Iraqi targets last weekend.
Given the close relationship between
Russian
Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov and Saddam Hussein (the former served for years as the
latter’s KGB case officer), the apparent compromise of that operation may have occurred when
sensitive intelligence collected by the Lourdes sigint facilities was turned over to Baghdad. And,
had President Clinton not aborted the mission, this compromise may well have reduced its
effectiveness and sacrificed American service personnel.(2)

    Cuban Chernobyl-Equivalent

Castro is also pursuing what amounts to a nuclear
catastrophe-in-the-making
for as
many as 50 to 80 million Americans, according to the General Accounting Office and other
official sources. Due to design, construction and other irretrievable flaws, the two reactors that
have long been under construction near Juragua, Cuba — 180 miles upwind from the American
mainland — will almost certainly be subject to a major accident if allowed to come on-line.
According to the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, depending upon the
prevailing winds at the time of such a Chernobyl-like disaster, areas as far north as Washington,
D.C. and as far west as Texas could fall under the resulting radioactive plume. href=”#N_3_”>(3)

    Facilitating the Drug Trade

The Cuban regime no longer enjoys the multi-billion dollar annual subsidies from
Moscow
that once enabled it to serve as the USSR’s Foreign Legion in Africa and as a proxy for the
Kremlin in the subversion of democratic and other, pro-Western governments throughout this
hemisphere. The loss of this revenue stream has been offset somewhat by Havana’s
narco-trafficking under the protection and with the assistance of the Cuban military.

The
gravity of this danger for the United States was explained in a letter sent by
Representatives
Lincoln Diaz-Balart
(R-FL), Dan Burton (R-IN) and Ileana
Ros-Lehtinen
(R-FL) to Gen.
Barry McCaffrey,
President Clinton’s Director of the Office of Drug Control Policy, on
18
November 1996. It states, in part:

    “Overwhelming evidence [including a number of cases cited in the letter] points to
    ongoing involvement of the Castro dictatorship in narco-trafficking. The Congress
    remains deeply concerned about this issue, and we are deeply disappointed that the
    Administration continues publicly [to] ignore this critical matter.”

    Biological Weapons

In remarks made earlier this year at a Casey Institute Symposium on “Vital U.S.
Security
Interests in Cuba” in Palm Beach, Florida, Rep. Diaz-Balart expressed concern that Cuba
is
pursuing an ominous biological weapons program
href=”#N_4_”>(4):

    “There is a developing file on the biological weapons component of the Cuban reality.
    It is obvious that we are seeing a cover-up by the Clinton Administration of the drug
    trafficking aspect of that reality. I have more than enough evidence of that cover up.
    And I am reaching the conclusion, as well, of the existence of a cover up on the
    biological weapons reality.”

    “The Clinton Administration has decided that Castro is to be confronted in no
    way — that there is not to be made public any possible concern that could affect
    the national security of the American people from Castro’s Cuba. That is a policy
    of the Clinton Administration. I say that publicly, privately, and everything in
    between, because I am absolutely convinced of it.”

The Bottom Line

The United States cannot afford to ignore the abiding — and, in some areas, increasing —
threat
posed by Cuba to the United States. Make no mistake about it, as long as Castro remains in
power, American citizens and interests will continue to be at risk from such asymmetric threats.

No less troubling than the willingness of some to discount this reality is the naivete of those
who
believe that “engagement” with Communist dictators — involving intensified commercial relations
and “people to people” contacts — will transform those regimes. In fact, such steps
would have
perpetuated the Soviet Union. Today, they are propping up, if not actually
strengthening,
potentially hostile governments in places like Beijing, Pyongyang and Hanoi.

The United States must not permit the multilateral rescheduling of long-defaulted
Cuban
debt since such a step will, by design, immediately and officially open the floodgates to new
investment and credit flows to the Castro regime.
Prior to the Paris Club sessions on
this
subject (expected to be held next month), the Congress should insist that the U.S. exercise its
effective veto of this sort of life-support gambit. Moreover, those allied capitals that have already
agreed to bilateral reschedulings of Cuba debt — or are contemplating such a move —
should be
put on notice by the Congress that there may be repercussions for the banks and governments
involved.

Finally, if the so-called National Bipartisan Commission on Cuba is going to
proceed, its
membership should be comprised equally of individuals who favor the present policy and
those who wish to see it changed
so as to permit the merits of policy options to be
vetted in a
thorough, balanced and non-pre-determined way.

– 30 –

1. See the Casey Institute’s Perspective entitled
Secretary Cohen, Casey Institute Symposia
Agree: Castro’s Cuba Remains and Asymmetric Threat
( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=98-R_80″>No. 98-R 80, 7 May 1998).

2. Congressional hearings into the apparently compromised
operational security of the U.S.
operation last weekend should be an early priority for the 106th Congress. See
Will Clinton Just
Pay Lip-Service to the ‘Liberation’ of Iraq — Or Will He Take Concerted Action to Achieve
It?
(No. 98-D 185, 16 November 1998).

3. For more information on this subject see the following Casey
Institute Perspectives entitled
Castro’s Cuba: A Classic Asymmetric Threat ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=98-C_59″>No. 98-C 59, 3 April 1998) and One Step
Forward, Two Back on U.S. Vulnerability: Clinton Announces Defenses, Limits Their Effect
— Perhaps Fatally
(No. 97-C 91, 27 May 1998).

4. See the Casey Institute’s Perspective entitled
Secretary Cohen, Casey Institute Symposia
Agree: Castro’s Cuba Remains and Asymmetric Threat
( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=98-R_80″>No. 98-R 80, 7 May 1998).

Center for Security Policy

Please Share:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *