Usa Forum - State Dept's Shannon on US Cuba Policy - Aug 23, 2006

NY.Transfer.News

8/25/2006 6:38:00 PM

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

State Dept's Shannon on US Cuba Policy - Aug 23, 2006

Via NY Transfer News Collective * All the News that Doesn't Fit

[Shannon succeeded the anti-Cuban zealot Roger Noriega,
who resigned as Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere
Affairs after he lost a turf war. -NY Transfer]

sent by Walter Lippmann (cubanews)

US State Dept - Aug 23, 2006
http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/2006...

U.S. Policy Toward Cuba

Thomas Shannon, Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs
Foreign Press Center Briefing
Washington, DC
August 23, 2006 - 3:00 P.M. EDT

Real Audio of Briefing: [34 minutes]
rtsp://66.63.11.8/shan08061.rm

THOMAS A. SHANNON

TOPIC: "U.S. POLICY TOWARD CUBA"

THE WASHINGTON FOREIGN PRESS CENTER, WASHINGTON, DC
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 23, 2006, 3:00 P.M. EDT

MODERATOR: Good afternoon and welcome to the Foreign Press Center.
This afternoon Assistant Secretary of State Tom Shannon will be
giving a briefing on U.S. policy towards Cuba. He'll open with a
short statement and then be happy to take your questions. He's got
somewhat of a tight schedule this afternoon, so I'd ask you to try to
make your questions short and we'll get through as many as we can.
Thank you.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Good afternoon and thank you all very
much for your time. I'm happy to take your questions.

I just wanted to start by making a couple of quick remarks. First,
obviously events in Cuba over the past several weeks have provoked a
lot of interest in what's happening in Cuba, how the United States
and the rest of the international community would respond and
ultimately what the results are going to be of Fidel Castro's health
crisis and what it means for the Castro regime in Havana. And from
our point and more importantly what it means in terms of the
possibility of a transition to democracy in Cuba.

We believe that, you know, what we're seeing in Cuba today is
effectively a slow motion transfer of power that Fidel Castro given
his age and given the kind of health crisis he went through is really
- -- does not appear at least to be in a position to return to the kind
of day-to-day management of affairs that he had effectively enjoyed
for so many decades. And that as a result of this, what is happening
is the institutions of the totalitarian state, the institutions of
the Cuban state, are in a process or period of negotiation as they
attempt to determine what the power-sharing arrangements will be.

>From our point of view, this is actually a very propitious moment to
begin to talk aloud about the importance of a transition to democracy
in Cuba and the importance of finding a way to show solidarity with
the Cuban people. It is our view that Cuba's future has to be
determined by the Cuban people. That ultimately no political solution
can be imposed from the outside, neither from the United States nor
any other country. But that it's imperative that the Cuban people be
able to choose their future.

President Oscar Arias of Costa Rica in a comment several days ago
said that after 47 years of socialism and revolution now might be the
time to allow the Cuban people to choose their leadership. We agree
with President Arias. And we think that this is a moment in which the
international community can, number one, make it clear to the current
regime that in order for it to continue to enjoy the benefits of
associating with the international community it really needs to begin
a process of political opening that would lead to a transition to
democracy in Cuba. But that also now is the moment for the
international community to make clear to the Cuban people both
through its political support but also to providing resources to
Cuban civil society; that now is the moment to begin to develop a
political space inside of Cuba to allow a national dialogue among the
Cuban people so that those people may indeed determine what their own
future is.

You might recall that in 2002 President Bush in a speech in May of
2002 effectively made an offer to the Cuban regime. He said that if
the Cuban regime were prepared to free political prisoners, respect
human rights -- especially those rights most important for the
effective exercise of democracy -- if he were prepared to permit the
creation of independent organizations such as political parties,
trade unions, civic associations that were dominated by the state,
and if he were prepared to create a mechanism and a pathway towards
elections that we would look in consultation with our Congress for
ways to lift the embargo and begin a deeper engagement with the Cuban
state.

In 2002, obviously that offer was rejected by the Castro regime. But
from our point of view, the offer's still on the table and we believe
that if the Cuban Government were to begin a political opening and a
transition to democracy, we could be in a position following the
offer made in 2002 to begin to look at ways to deepen our own
relationship with Cuba.

I'd like to stop there and take your questions.

MODERATOR: Please wait for the microphone and state your name and
organization.

QUESTION: Paulo Sotero from O Estado de Sao Paulo, Brazil. Mr.
Secretary, I'd like to ask you two questions regarding this offer
that you mentioned is on the table. It is, given the changes of the
situation that you described initially, is this an offer the same --
it's on the table the same way it was before, like take the offer or
- -- and if you don't, we don't talk? Or is this now an offer that
relates to the beginning of a process that could lead Cuba to the
objectives that you described in terms of more political
participation, freeing prisoners, et cetera?

And the second thing is many analysts I've talked to say that the
problem for the United States, in view of what's happening in Cuba,
is that you really -- because of the embargo and other things, you
don't have a horse in this game. You don't play. And that the United
States has taken itself out of the possibility of influencing in a
positive way the democratization of Cuba. I'd like to have your
reaction.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Yeah. Thank you very much for both of
those questions. I mean, obviously, we have a horse in this race or
obviously you wouldn't be here. I mean, we wouldn't be here if we
didn't have a horse in this race. And the kind of interest that is
generated in the U.S. position obviously wouldn't be the case. And
given, you know, the historic interest the United States has had in
creating a transition to democracy in Cuba, given the demographic
linkages between the United States and Cuba, but also more broadly,
given the effort made to work towards democratizing the Americas, our
interest in Cuba is profound and we believe we have a significant
role to play in a transition. But that said, it's important to note
that this is not about the United States and Cuba. This is about the
United States and the Americas. We live in a hemisphere that has made
a commitment to democracy through the Inter-American Democratic
Charter. It is, if you recall, the first article of that charter, it
says that all the peoples of the Americas have a right to democracy
and their governments have an obligation to promote and defend it.
We believe that.

And from our point of view, what we would like to see is a Cuba that
could reintegrate itself into the inter-American community, that
could return to the Organization of American States, that could
become part of the Inter-American Development Bank and could play a
useful role in all the other institutions of the Inter-American
system. But in order for that to happen, Cuba must have a transition
to democracy because ultimately a democracy is the fundamental
requirement to be a member of the OAS, to be a member of the
Inter-American System and to participate in the Summit of the
Americas process.

And in that regard, the nature of the offer made in 2002 remains the
same in the sense that it is through a transition to democracy that
Cuba solves its problems, not just with the United States but with
the rest of the inter-American community, with the rest of the
Inter-American System.

Now, obviously political openings and democratizations can take a
variety of forms. And we'd be very interested in hearing from the
Cubans themselves about how they would -- how they envision that
happening, if they envision it at all. The initial comments that we
have received don't seem to indicate a whole lot of interest, but
we're listening.

MODERATOR: Go to the middle.

QUESTION: Jesus Esquivel from Proceso magazine of Mexico. I have two
questions for you. The one on Cuba... According to some people who
know Raul, even some U.S. military officials, they say Raul is more
open to talks with the U.S. than Fidel. And since the fact that in
this few days when Fidel was in bed that he took the power and
nothing happened inside of Cuba, except in Miami with the Cubans
making noise and everything. Do you think it's time for the U.S. to
have more direct talks or conversations with Raul instead of trying
to get another conversation with the old regime? And especially with
Cuban military officials who are the supporters of the ways -- the
political ways of Raul Castro?

And the second question has to do with Mexico. Are you -- I mean, the
U.S. Government is it worried that the situation in Mexico City with
the people of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador could result in some
political fights on the streets in Mexico or violence in the streets
of Mexico, especially from the embassy in the next few days when
there's going to be the celebration of the Mexican independence and
the last State of the Union by President Fox?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Okay. Let me deal with the first
question first and then I'll answer the second. In regard to Raul
Castro or whomever might be representing the regime in Cuba -- and as
I indicated earlier, I think what -- in a moment in which the future
leadership structure still has not been defined, obviously for public
purposes, Raul Castro has been designated as the heir apparent. But
as I indicated, I really think what we're seeing here is a transfer
of power to institutions and not to individuals and that there will
be, to a certain extent, negotiations among those institutions as
they try to come to some kind of power-sharing arrangement with Fidel
Castro being some kind of ultimate arbiter.

That said, where the conversation, we think, needs to take place
right now is not between us and the regime; it's between the regime
and the Cuban people. Because ultimately, what we're looking at is a
sign of political opening. We're not looking for a diplomatic opening
to the United States. Ultimately, our goal has never been to fix our
bilateral relationship with Cuba. Our goal has been to free the Cuban
people and to create a democracy, recognizing that in that process
will be the solution to the bilateral problems. Now as I indicated
earlier, there are different manners and forms of opening and we're
not sure what to anticipate at this moment, so we're watching
intently, we're listening intently. But at the end of the day, this
is something that is not going to be solved between Cuba and outside
parties. Ultimately, Cuba's future is going to be decided inside of
Cuba by Cubans and the most we can do is create a context in which
that solution can be democratic.

And in regard to Mexico, we continue to underscore our support for
Mexico's electoral institutions and its democratic institutions. We
have a lot of confidence in those institutions. We have a lot of
confidence in Mexico's leadership. And we recognize that this is a
moment in which Mexico is waiting for final results to be released by
the Supreme Electoral Council and that until those results are
announced, that there is no formal winner. And we plan to respect
Mexico's timetable and to wait for those announcements.

You know, Mexico has gone through profound political changes in a
very short period of time and it has done so in a peaceful and, I
think, a very positive and productive fashion. It is a tremendous
compliment and tribute to Mexico's institutions and, we believe, to
the larger commitment of the Mexican people to those institutions.
And therefore, we're confident that Mexico and its institutions will
find a way through this period and will emerge with a government that
is effective and efficient and democratic.

QUESTION: Aren't you worried *about violence*?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I am not.

MODERATOR: We have a question from New York. We'll take that one.

QUESTION: Mr. Shannon, Diego Senior from Caracol Radio in Colombia.
I have two questions also for you. The first is about Cuba and the
second one about Colombia.

You just mentioned that you plan to create a context in which you
want Cuba to find its way into democracy. How much is the U.S.
willing to give in to create this context?

And the second question about Colombia is a recent article in the New
York Times mentioned that Plan Colombia had basically failed. We saw
a pronouncement by John Walters and Anne Patterson about it, also
that they're leaving less money for Plan Colombia. Do you think that
Plan Colombia definitely failed or what do you -- what's your answer
to the New York Times also in this very important article?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: In regard to the first question, again
what we're looking for is a political opening in Cuba that begins to
create conditions that would allow a democratic transition to take
place. And we kind of sketched out some of the basic components of
that such as releasing political prisoners, respecting human rights,
allowing the creation of independent organizations, and creating
mechanisms and pathways towards free and fair elections.

We think that this is kind of the basic structure that's required to
kind of suck the venom and the fear out of the Cuban system and
create an environment in which people can begin having conversations
with a degree of confidence about what the future of Cuba can be and
should be.

And in this regard it's important to understand again that the
international community's role in this, what it can usefully do, is
really through its solidarity with the Cuban people. It's really
about sending clear political messages to the regime about the
unacceptability of political repression. It is about sending clear
messages to the Cuban people about the willingness to help Cuba move
through this transition period, and also in terms of solidarity
making it clear that the international community wants Cuba back into
the fold, back as part of a community of democratic nations.

And in this regard we would certainly not see a response to a
political opening and to a beginning of a transition process as a
giving in; quite the contrary, we would see it as part of a covenant
or a contract that we have effectively made with the Cuban people.
And in fact, when the second report of the Commission for Assistance
to a Free Cuba was released, also released with it was a compact with
the Cuban people in which we made clear kind of what we were prepared
to do in the event that a transition would begin.

In regard to the second question, I mean, obviously we don't think
Plan Colombia has failed. If you look at where Colombia is today
compared to where it was five years ago, the differences are
striking. They are profound. Not only in terms of the ability of the
Colombian state to project itself throughout its national territory
and its ability to eradicate coca where it was never eradicated
previously, such as in the national parks, but also in terms of the
kind of confidence that Colombians have expressed themselves about
their ability to conduct their business, to travel on their highways,
but also the degree to which Colombia moves more easily in the
international community.

One of the clearest signs from our point of view of successful
domestic and internal policy is greater influence externally. And
what's evident is that as Colombia has consolidated its democratic
security policies, as it has improved its ability to attack not only
coca leaf production but also the production of cocaine and its
movement, but also as Colombia has gotten kind of deeper control of
its larger security problems, it has become a much more influential
country outside of Colombia. And in this regard we see it in Central
America, we see it in the Caribbean and we see it in the Andean
community.

So from our point of view, Plan Colombia has been a success. And more
importantly, as we engage with Colombia in the future, our job is
going to be to make sure that we can consolidate that success and
deepen it over time.

QUESTION: Thank you. Sonia Schott with Radio Valera Venezuela and
Selecta from Panama.

Mr. Shannon, I would like to know in couple of days ago the U.S.
Administration announced a kind of project mission toward Cuba and
Venezuela. I will like to know what is the meaning of that? It is
more of the old policy toward Cuba, toward Cuba, now Cuba and
Venezuela, or it's a kind of new policy toward Cuba and Venezuela,
and what do you expect from this new policy? Thank you.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: I'm sorry. But by the new project, what
are you referring to?

QUESTION: It is kind of -- I don't know. It is -- it was announced a
couple of days ago. That's why my question. It's a kind of mission or
project.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: You're referring to the announcement
made by the Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte?

QUESTION: Yes.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: The position he created was effectively
kind of a team chief or mission chief that would manage the analysis
of -- effectively creating kind of a Cuba-Venezuela office to manage
analysis of information related to both Cuba and Venezuela. It's part
of our effort to understand better the relationship between Cuba and
Venezuela and I'm afraid I can't say much more than that at this
point. I think the press release, you know, from the Director of
National Intelligence has said about as much as can be said.

But I would like to point out, obviously, that there is a special
relationship between Venezuela and Cuba and there is a special
relationship between President Hugo Chavez and the Cuban regime,
especially the leadership of that regime. And as I've said in other
fora, this is an important moment for Venezuela. Venezuela has an
opportunity, we believe, to play an important and useful role in
Cuba's future if it chooses to associate itself with a successful
democratic transition, if it chooses to recognize its obligations
under the Inter-American Democratic Charter to promote and defend
democracy. And we hope that that's the decision that Venezuela and
President Chavez are prepared to take.

It would be a sad thing indeed, at this particular time in the
history of the Americas, after so much effort has been extended to
make this a democratic hemisphere, to find ourselves within reach of
consolidating that -- the promise of the Americas and making the
entire Americas democratic, to find a state prepared to side with a
totalitarian regime.

QUESTION: Gabriel Elizondo from Al-Jazeera International. Mr.
Secretary, can you speak to specifically the importance, in your
view, of -- or not thereof of U.S. business interests in the
hastening of democracy in Cuba, number one? Specifically, do you
think U.S. business interests are important at all in a potential
future transition in Cuba? And secondarily, is the State Department
working at all or consulting at all with any sort of U.S. business
interest companies or organizations to help hasten a move to
democracy in Cuba? Thank you, sir.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Okay. Thank you for that question.
Cuba is a country caught in a time warp economically in terms of its
infrastructure. And as Cuba makes a transition to democracy, it also
has to make a transition to modernity. And it has in front of itself
some huge challenges, huge environmental challenges, as I mentioned,
infrastructure challenges, housing and construction challenges, not
to mention everything that would be involved in creating private
markets and managing the flow of investment that we believe would be
prepared to enter a democratic Cuba.

And in that regard, U.S. business obviously would have a role to
play, but what's important to understand here is that as we look at
ways to promote a democratic transition in Cuba, this is much more
than a U.S. project. It's a project of the Americas and it's a
project of a community of nations that is committed to democracy. And
there are companies now already invested in Cuba that, if they chose
to, could play a useful role in a transition. And we believe that the
kinds of opportunities that would be present in a democratic Cuba
would be the kind of thing that would sustain a very robust
relationship between businesses throughout the world and the Cuban
people. And therefore, you know, while obviously U.S. business would
want to be part of that, that there would be an opportunity, I think,
for the Cuban people to enjoy prosperity based on investments from
many different countries and many different companies.

And in regard to a consulting with U.S. business, right now, the
kinds of consultations we're really involved in, and these have been
managed largely through our Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez,
have been about providing humanitarian assistance in the event of a
- -- the beginning of a transition to democracy. Because one of the
things we want to do along -- you know, working with our partners in
the international community is make sure that as Cuba goes through a
transition, that the international community can help provide some
kind of social safety net so that Cubans do not find themselves in a
situation, as big changes take place in their country, where they're
suddenly without the kinds of services that they might have expected.
And we think in that sense, U.S. business could play a very important
role.

QUESTION: Yes, thank you. Maria Pena with EFE News Services. You made
references, at least two or three references to the fact that you
want the -- whatever changes happen in Cuba to happen from within the
island, no outside parties. However, the Cuban exile community has
played a significant role in, for instance, maintaining the U.S.
embargo towards Cuba since 1962. So you don't see any role for them
at all in that transition period? I mean, the Cuban exile community
is the first one to want those changes in the island. Thank you.

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: There are many people who want the
changes in the island and actually it's the U.S. Congress that's
maintained the embargo over time and the U.S. Congress represents all
50 states. And the Cuban-American population is a highly concentrated
population, so as important as the Cuban-American population has been
to promoting democracy in Cuba, it's important to understand that
this has been something -- this is something over time, over many
decades, over many administrations and across many political parties
has enjoyed broad support.

But in terms of who has an influence on the island, the demographic
links between Cubans in Cuba and Cubans outside of Cuba is
significant. And it's not only to the United States; there are large
Cuban populations in Spain, there are large Cuban populations in
Venezuela and in Mexico and elsewhere in the Western Hemisphere. And
we would certainly see the communication between these different
groups as important during a transition simply in terms of the
ability to kind of break down a larger information blockade that this
regime has sought to impose on the Cuban people. But ultimately, it
is the people inside of Cuba who are going to have to make the
decisions and take the actions regarding a transition. They can
expect help. They can expect solidarity from outside of Cuba from all
kinds of different groups. But ultimately, it is the Cubans in the
Cuba who are going to determine Cuba's fate.

MODERATOR: We have time for one more. Yes, sir.

QUESTION: Hugo Alconada from La Nacion, Argentina. On Cuba, clearly,
elaborate a little bit more about how your feedback about internal
affairs in Cuba, given that, for instance, while Chavez is able to
travel over there and talk over there or fund all the projects from
Cuba the United States is about to improve now its intelligence about
Cuba and Venezuela? What's your real feedback about what is going on
over there?

ASSISTANT SECRETARY SHANNON: Well, you have to remember Cuba as a
totalitarian regime is very opaque. This is a regime that does not
believe in sharing information. It believes in guarding information
and then using it for political purposes, oftentimes to manipulate.
But we feel that we have a decent understanding of what's happening
inside of Cuba. I mean, we have Interests Section in Havana. We've
had an Interests Section in Havana for quite some time. And so we
have the ability to get out and about and to see what's happening in
Cuba. And again because of the demographic links, there's lots of
communication between Cubans on the island and Cubans outside of
Cuba.

And so in that regard, although it's an opaque, opaque regime, it's
not necessarily an opaque country. But I think that this is a moment
kind of fraught with possibility, but also fraught with anxiety
inside of Cuba because a regime that finds itself in a moment of
power transfer, especially a transfer from a leader such as Fidel
Castro to effectively institutions, to bureaucrats, is one which is
going to be inherently unstable. These transitions are never easy to
make as we've seen throughout the history of communist countries and
they almost certainly require greater repression if the regime is to
maintain itself.

And so I think that in Cuba today you have a moment in which there is
a degree of hope and desire to have a future which really does
involve freedom and democracy and really does allow the Cuban people
on an individual basis not only to determine their national destiny,
but also to have greater control over their individual destinies. But
at the same time, an anxiety or a fear that the interests of the
state, interests that have been created over 47 years of single-party
rule, are going to be enormous and that the desires are very small
political -- small groups of political elites to maintain those
privileges is going to be so intense that they're prepared to use
great repression on their own people. And therefore we're at this
kind of crossroads between hopefulness and fear.

And one of the reasons why it's so important for the international
community to speak up today, for the community of democratic nations
to speak up today, is to accentuate the hopefulness and to let the
Cuban people know that outside of Cuba there is also a hopefulness
that Cuba indeed will be democratic, that it will begin a transition
to democracy and that through that transition, Cuba will once again
become part of the Inter-American community and the Americas can say
that we have truly indeed fulfilled our promise as a democratic
hemisphere.

Anyway, thank you all very, very much for your time. I really
appreciate it.

MODERATOR: Thank you for coming.

*
================================================================
NY Transfer News Collective * A Service of Blythe Systems
Since 1985 - Information for the Rest of Us
Search Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/htdig/s...
List Archives: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/piper...
Subscribe: http://olm.blythe-systems.com/mailman/lis...
================================================================

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFE70Mviz2i76ou9wQRAgEHAJwOPVNJO18bWBqBw7ESmXRsyTQZJACcDJUi
L+5IUc+I7/qWio5ARyujXFE=
=7no3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

soc.culture.cuba

State Dept's Shannon on US Cuba Policy - Aug 23, 2006

NY.Transfer.News

x Login to ForumsZone