Anger Simmers Among Cubans Over N.Y. Pols

NEWS



Anger Simmers Among Cubans Over N.Y. Pols

BY MEGHAN CLYNE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
May 17, 2005

Puzzling and enraging some of New York City's Cuban-Americans, the state's congressional delegation has led the opposition to a House resolution expressing American solidarity with Cuba's democratic activists, on the eve of what is being called a historic gathering on the Communist-ruled island.

"They want human rights for everybody on earth, except for Cuba," a Manhattan resident, Maria Restoy, said of the congressmen who voted against the resolution.

"They don't care that my people are suffering in Cuba," she said.

Friday marks the beginning of the General Meeting of the Assembly to Promote Civil Society in Cuba, a convention of 365 groups in Havana to discuss, among other issues, fostering democratic reform on the island, reducing poverty, securing labor rights, and protecting the environment.

One of the meeting's organizers, the dissident Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello, has been jailed by the Castro regime for pro-democracy activism in the past. The last similar attempt to convene a major gathering in Cuba - a planned meeting of a human rights organization, the Concilio Cubano, in February 1996 - failed, resulting in a crackdown by the government that extended over several months.

Observers and the organizers of this week's event said in recent days that the assembly, owing to its size and visibility, poses a threat to participants' safety. Reports from Havana indicate that the Castro regime has already begun arresting activists in anticipation of the gathering. Also, according to Cuban exiles in Miami, the organizers' home telephone service has been cut sporadically in recent weeks.

Calls to Ms. Roque's number yesterday could not be completed.

To encourage participants, the assembly has solicited and received expressions of support and solidarity from representatives of international organizations, including members of the European Parliament and members of the American Congress. Last Tuesday, the House of Representatives approved H.R. 193, which, among other provisions, extends "support and solidarity to the organizers and participants of the historic meeting." The resolution, introduced by a Republican of Florida, Mario Diaz-Balart, passed by a vote of 392 to 22. The bill had more than 50 co-sponsors, including a Democrat from New York, Rep. Eliot Engel of the Bronx.

New York was the best-represented state among the resolution's opponents, however, with six New York Democrats among the 22 nay votes. They included Charles Rangel of Harlem; Jose Serrano of the Bronx; Edolphus Towns of Brooklyn; Nydia Velazquez of Brooklyn, and Gregory Meeks of Queens, as well as Maurice Hinchey, whose district stretches from Poughkeepsie to Ithaca.

Mr. Serrano said New York's congressional delegation led the opposition to the bill "because we're enlightened on this issue."

"I really believe the New York delegation, more than any of the other delegations, understands that this is all about Florida politics - the state that gave the Republicans the presidency in the 2000 election on a questionable count," Mr. Serrano said. "If there was no Jeb Bush in Florida, and no strong Miami community, we would perhaps treat Cuba differently."

Mr. Rangel said he voted against the Cuba resolution because of American politicians' attitudes toward the regime in Havana. They "refuse to give the government the respect that it deserves," he said. Of the assembly, Mr. Rangel said: "I don't think it helps to be supporting insurgents overthrowing the government." The better approach to American-Cuban relations, Mr. Rangel said, is "trying to reach out to the government to see what we can do to help both the government and people of Cuba, not just isolating them by dealing with dissidents."

Mr. Meeks said that while he supports democracy in Cuba, he opposed the language in the resolution critical of Mr. Castro. In the opening sections of H.R. 193, the Cuban government is labeled a "terrorist regime."

Cuba is one of seven countries identified as state sponsors of terrorism by the American Department of State.

Mr. Hinchey, too, said he objected to the language of the legislation, which he said "originates with the descendants of the Batista regime, who trace their origins back to the 1950s."

"It does nothing to improve the situation in Cuba ... it just continues the same old worn-out, tired, silly policies," the upstate Democrat said.

"Castro is harmful to no one," Mr. Hinchey said.

"To the extent that any harm is being done, it's the continuation of this policy over the last five decades now," he said, referring to the American embargo. An aide to Mr. Hinchey later called to clarify the congressman's statement, saying the Cuban strongman had done no harm "in a national security sense."

Some Cuban-American New Yorkers, however, saw the votes against the solidarity resolution as an embarrassment.

Ms. Restoy, who left Cuba in 1980 at age 21, said she had grown up observing how figures like Mr. Castro and Ernesto "Che" Guevara had plundered her homeland. "How can these congressmen have the nerve to ally themselves with these thieves and criminals?" she said.

A constituent of Mr. Rangel's who is chairman of Manhattan's Community Board 9, Jordi Reyes-Montblanc, said he had great respect for his congressman, but the representatives voting against the resolution were "totally misguided."

"They don't understand the situation. They've been sold a bill of goods," Mr. Reyes-Montblanc said.

To a filmmaker living in Manhattan, Ivan Acosta, the congressmen's actions were "shameful" and "pitiful."

Mr. Acosta, who left Cuba in 1962 at age 17, said that it was especially embarrassing to have such opposition to Mr. Diaz- Balart's bill from New York City, which, he said, has always welcomed refugees from tyranny from around the world.

The intention behind that resolution, Mr. Diaz-Balart said, was to make sure "the international community and the U.S. watch out, to be vigilant so that Castro does not punish anyone more than he already has."

Democracy advocates are already watching the island, where the Castro regime's response to Friday's meeting, observers say, will signal much about the health of the communist state.

Indeed, to a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a former Polish dissident, Radek Sikorski, the meeting itself is a sign that Mr. Castro's rule is severely weakened.

"In a truly totalitarian state," Mr. Sikorski, who recently visited Cuba, said, "you wouldn't even dream of thinking about it, let alone planning about it."

"It shows a decay of the regime, a loss of its will to power, if you like," he said.

The director of the Washington based Center for a Free Cuba, Frank Calzon, said the results of the assembly's meeting would depend heavily on how fearful the Cuban government is of its own people.

"If Castro believes the situation could get out of hand, and that as a result of the meeting there could be more meetings and other demands, he could go way beyond what he has done so far" in terms of cracking down on dissent, Mr. Calzon said.

The May 20 meeting, however, is an important first step in enabling Cubans to discuss openly the nation's problems, he said.

Calls to the Cuban Mission to the United Nations yesterday were not returned.


105 Chambers Street, New York, NY 10007
C 2005 The New York Sun, One SL, LLC. All rights reserved.