The Buying of "Democracy" Agents in Cuba
- From: Dan Christensen <dchris@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 20:39:48 -0700 (PDT)
05/23/08
Cuba-L Analysis (Albuquerque)
Unequal Exchange and the Buying of "Democracy" Agents in Cuba
by Nelson P Valdes
"The populace may hiss me, but when I go home and think of my money, I
applaud myself. " - Horace (c. 25 BC)
"Unequal exchange, as practiced by the conquerors with the natives
purchasing gold with mirrors, marbles and European trinkets, must
cease." Fidel Castro, 1998
In fiscal year 2008-2009 the United States government has budgeted
$45,000,000 to finance the opposition against the revolutionary
government in Cuba. The money is used to fund rightwing exile
organizations, eastern European rightwing politicians involved with
Cuba and money oriented "civil society" promoters. Some of the money
ends up in Cuba. The details of such counterrevolutionary program is
little known by the world. The Cubans within the island who receive
the so-called "assistance" claim to be involved in promoting "civil
society" and "democracy." They maintain that what they are doing is
not subversive. The official line from the United States government is
that the money it supplies has a humanitarian intent. The recipients,
however, are agents of a foreign power if we follow US law
definitions. [1] It is unknown how much money the United States
government is really spending to bring an end to the revolutionary
government in Havana. [2]
The videos, photos, documents and phone conversation logs transmitted
over the Mesa Redonda TV program in Havana during three consecutive
days (May 19, 20, 21) disclosed some of the mechanisms used to provide
money payments to dissidents via Marta Beatriz Roque, a sort of
dissident paymaster/accountant in Havana. She describes herself in her
emails to rightwing exiles and US officials, as Tia McPato (as in the
Disney character - Aunt Scrooge McDuck. )
The money provided to the "dissidents" seem to be mere peanuts, when
compared to the total amount of money appropriated by the US Congress.
Indeed, it is obvious, that the "dissidents" provide the "cover" for
the real entrepreneurs in Florida to enrich themselves. One can very
well assume that if the US AID grants a lump sum of, say, $5 million
to a Miami "democracy promotion organization" and then the
organization puts the money in a bank to get yearly earnings - the
earnings might be sufficient to finance the "dissidents". Miami, of
course, will keep the lion's share of the grant. And the "grant" [our
tax dollars at work] will be renewed the following years. Both
Republicans and Democrats in the Congress approve of a "foreign aid"
that ends up in Coral Gables and the Florida keys.
In a sense, the "dissidents" in the island face all the political and
economic costs but receive very little of the financial benefits -
when compared to exile "donors." Granted, a monthly payment of
$200-1,500 US dollars is certainly 100 times what the average Cuban
earns. Yet, the island "dissidents" thank the exile "donors" abroad
when in fact; the exile entrepreneurs should be thanking the
"dissidents." Or, to put it differently, the "dissidents" are the
proletarians while the Miami hustlers are the bourgeois employers.
The logic of such political opposition is NOT to be too successful in
the REAL recruiting of thousands of political opponents inside Cuba.
To do so would be a major logistical and financial conundrum - for
that success would imply much more financial accounting. Rather, the
best strategy is to CLAIM a lot of political proselytizing in order to
obtain as much funding from abroad as possible.
The Miami promoters/handlers need the "dissidents" but do not want
them to get too much of a claim over the capital available. This is
accomplished by obtaining invoices for all services rendered. In a
sense, this whole enterprise moves millions of dollars in Florida and
elsewhere, but it comes to "penny capitalism" in Havana.
Marta Beatriz Roque distributes an average of $200 per "dissident".
Thus, if 10 "dissidents"= $200x10=$2000; 100 "dissidents", $20,000 and
so forth. By playing such a role Marta Beatriz Roque is not a
political "leader" but rather a financial "accountant." She knows so
and calls herself Tia MacPato. How much money she receives determines
how many people she could, potentially recruit. Of course, she could
increase the monthly payments of those who are already recruited. On
the other hand, that some of the "dissidents" do not seem to get any
money payment, perhaps behaving on the basis of "moral incentives" or
not realizing that everyone gets a fee for services rendered.
Interestingly, the money is supplied on a monthly basis rather than as
a lump sum. Tia McPato would like to get lump sums - that would
provide her with discretionary power. But it will reduce the political
influence that Miami would have over Havana. The one with the money
commands. Thus, payments are done on a monthly basis - although this
is a cumbersome logistical mechanism. But it is revealing what the
method accomplishes:
1. It reminds the recipient of the funds who is the boss - that is
Santiago Alvarez. 2. It makes the recipients financially dependent on
a monthly basis, which is a form of control: you don't deliver
political acts, you don't get paid. This is measured on the basis of
the foreign press reporting on the actions. 3. The monthly payments,
delivered by Marta Beatriz, is a form of political control. The money
payments is a tool of political recruitment and a form of retainer,
from month to month. 4. The monthly payments allow the people with the
capital in Florida (who received the money from the US government and
other undisclosed sources) to set up an account that earns interests.
Thus, if AID supplies the "non profit" organization in Miami with the
capital, then the money is put in an interest earning account.
The relationship between the Miami promoters/bourgeoisie and the
Havana "dissident"/proletarians is a very unique exchange. Miami has
US-government supplied financial capital; Havana "dissidents" claim to
have political capital. The latter is seemingly correlated with time
served in a Cuban prison or openly challenging the Cuban authorities;
both generate more political capital in the eyes of the Miami and
Washington DC promoters of long-distance "democracy". Those who have
been arrested or answer to the behest of the US Interest Section have
a higher exchange value than those who do not. Moreover, those who
served some prison time but do not continue their day to day
"demonstration politics" then do not get pay as much as those who do.
Tia McPato who is the money distributor among the "dissidents" claims
the political leadership over the proletarians.
In such a relationship, it becomes imperative for the proletarians to
try to extort as much from the employers abroad. This requires that
the actions of the "dissidents" be covered by the foreign press. ["If
a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make
a sound?"] In other words, political "show and tell" is the very stuff
of such "demonstration politics". No TV time or press headlines, no
pay. It is imperative, then, to cultivate the foreign media stationed
in Havana. The foreign media plays the part of the stock analyst who
keeps the market ratings on "dissidence" high. Seemingly, the
correspondents' job is to tout the market value of the "dissidents"
whose stock would be worthless if their real value were exposed.
The Cuban government has challenged the US government, the foreign
media stationed in Cuba, or the island's "dissidents" to answer head-
on the evidence that has been disclosed and the substantive charges.
It is doubtful that any of the players will do so. Meanwhile the
commercial enterprise called "democracy promotion" will continue.
Perhaps the promotion of democracy should begin with exporting to Cuba
some legislation from the United States. I propose that our country
prersuade the government in Havana to adopt from the US Code 18
U.S.C.A. 953 [1948] - better known as the Logan Act.
The Act reads in part, "Any citizen of the United States, wherever he
may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or
indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse
with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with
intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government
or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or
controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the
United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more
than three years, or both." [3] All that would be necessary is for the
Cuban government to replace the phrase "United States" and include
"Republic of Cuba."
Now, that might be an interesting way of furthering democracy.
------
[1] See the essay by Salim Lamrani: 05/07/08 - Rebelion (Madrid) - Las
contradicciones de Amnistia Internacional.
http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=67001&titular=las-contradicciones-de-amni\
st%EDa-internacional-
[2] There is a concurrent effort, also financed by the United States
government, to prepare the "transition teams" that will be sent once
the
Cuban revolutionary regime is overthrown. Just on May 8th, 2008 AID
requested proposals to the tune of $30 million from five US
corporations who
have been involved in such "transitions" elsewhere. Source: AID email,
May 8, 2008 entitled: COMPETITIVE TASK ORDER SOLICITATION IN SUPPORT
OF THE CUBA
DEMOCRACY AND CONTINGENCY PLANNING PROGRAM (CDCPP). See:
http://cuba-l.unm.edu/?id=47403&q=M/OAA/GRO/LMA-08-7825&h=
[3] See: U.S. Code, Title 19, Part I, Chapter 45, § 953
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000953----000-.html
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Prev by Date: Re: We can't let the di$$idents down
- Next by Date: Re: Indonesia to issue Castro, Che Guevara stamps
- Previous by thread: Bush Is a War Criminal
- Next by thread: Re: The Buying of "Democracy" Agents in Cuba
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
