The Cuban government had erected flags to block the view of the U.S. interest section’s news ticker in Havana.

It’s interesting to hear — but not very significant — that the United States under President Obama has turned off the useless news ticker that was running in the windows atop the U.S. interest section in Havana. The move is one more in a series of steps that leaves U.S.-Cuban relations still awaiting some major breakthrough after 50 years of hostility.

The news crawl was a vestige of the belligerent and unsuccessful U.S. policy toward Cuba during the administration of George W. Bush. The Bush administration pretended that it was a means of providing unfettered news to the Cuban people, but the streaming headlines did little more than to give the Cuban government a chance to rally support against American policies. At the time, Fidel Castro established a freedom plaza in front of the U.S. diplomatic building –- located along the Malecon, Cuba’s seafront — and big black flags obscured vision of the ticker when people drove past.

While Obama has rolled back a few other Bush era measures — allowing easier transit by Cuban-Americans to the island, and dropping strictures on how much money family members were allowed to send to their relatives on the island — nothing else has changed. The Cuban government, under Fidel’s brother, Raul, has toned down anti-U.S. rhetoric hoping for an eventual opening to U.S. tourism and other measures that could bring big economic changes in Cuba.

When I was in Cuba earlier this year, I didn’t see any indication that Cubans on the street were lacking information about the basics of what is happening in the United States and the world. And those I spoke to were also surprisingly willing– on camera — to criticize the government for not providing enough
employment, food and opportunities for improving their lives. Young and old were as enthusiastic as people around the world about the prospect of a vigorous, open-minded president of the United States, who happened to be a person of color. And they hoped that Obama would break the logjam.

Cubans appear to know the score, and they’re just tired of waiting for changes that will give them more contact with their friends and relatives in the outside world. Fifty years of the U.S. economic embargo has done nothing to incite popular insurrection in Cuba — if that was the goal — and most people in the United States, even a majority of Cuban-Americans, think it’s time for the embargo to go.

Political reality in the United States makes that difficult. Sen. Richard Lugar, an Indiana Republican, is promoting phased-in engagement with Cuba, and an eventual end of economic sanctions. The rationale is that increased contact will put the United States in a better position to promote a shift toward democratic change.

His middle-of-the-road approach clashes with hard-line opponents of the Castro brothers who want no change in relations unless Cuba makes a move first on political freedom. They note that several hundred political prisoners are held in Cuban jails. But the United States is unlikely to have leverage to bring any change under the current stagnant formula.

So Cuba and the United States continue plodding along, dealing with vestiges of failed rhetoric and policies passed. The news sign is off on the U.S. interest section, but there’s no sign in the short term that the Obama administration plans to go much further than that.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Indrani Soemardjan under a Creative Commons license.

Former State Department employee Walter Kendall Myers and his wife, Gwendolyn, are being held without bond on charges of spying for Cuba.

A strange case of alleged spying on behalf of Cuba has popped up in Washington, raising fascinating questions about personality, motivation and Cuba’s goals in espionage.

The case involves Kendall Myers, now retired from the State Department’s intelligence branch, and his wife Gwendolyn, a former computer specialist at Riggs National Bank.

The couple is portrayed as enthusiastic converts to the cause of protecting Cuba against the United States and providing information to the Cuban government for years.

They were caught by a sting in which an FBI agent posed as a Cuban operative and asked them to return to the fold after several years of avoiding spy activities.

The magistrate who denied bail in the case indicated, as reported by the Washington Post, that they were caught red-handed.

The judge also noted that Walter Kendall Myers, 72, and his wife, Gwendolyn, 71, had marked on their calendar a yacht trip to the Caribbean in November with no return date, indicating a possible escape plan.

“To put it bluntly, the government’s case seems at this point insuperable,” wrote U.S. Magistrate Judge John M. Facciola, in an opinion issued after a hearing in U.S. District Court.

Former colleagues of Kendall Myers are obviously upset, as the Post also reported:

“The bureau people are very angry about it. Really angry. But also bewildered,” said Wayne White, who worked on Middle Eastern issues in the bureau for a quarter-century before retiring in 2005. “This seemingly intelligent and urbane person was convinced that Castro’s Cuba was this terrific place?”

Among the interesting side notes to the case is the fact that Myers has an interesting pedigree. He has a PhD from John Hopkins and is a descendant of Alexander Graham Bell.

My friend Jeff Stein points out another interesting sidelight to the story, reported by The American Thinker.

A writer for the Web site noted that Gwendolyn Myers’ position at Riggs Bank, a prominent Washington, D.C. bank which folded several years ago, could have been more valuable to Cuban intelligence than the State Department link:

She could have provided valuable information on her own to the Cubans. At that time Riggs bank was the premiere banking institution in the Washington metropolitan area. It had branches in many big embassies, laundered money for people and governments, had CIA officials on its payroll and otherwise was the repository of significant amounts of information which would be of considerable use to Fidel.

Fidel Castro, for his part, said last week he knew nothing about the couple, and thought their arrest was related to opposition in the United States to a political opening toward Cuba.

He expressed doubt that any of it ever happened, but if it did he admired the Myers for what they might have done.

“The confrontation with the United States is of an ideological character and has nothing to do with the security of that country. Don’t you all find the whole story about Cuban espionage quite ridiculous?”

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user aylaleia under a Creative Commons license.

Barack Obama meets with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

At the 34-nation Summit of the Americas over the weekend, U.S. President Barack Obama promised a new approach to Latin American relations, meeting with such harsh critics of the U.S. as Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez. 

Cuba was a hot topic, as Obama recently loosened travel and remittances restrictions for Cuban Americans. ”The policy that we’ve had in place for 50 years hasn’t worked the way we want it to. The Cuban people are not free,” Obama said at the close of the summit on Sunday. 

Worldfocus editorial consultant Peter Eisner, the former deputy foreign editor of the Washington Post, puts Obama’s position on Cuba in context. 

No question about it: President Barack Obama brought his A-game to the Trinidad summit of Western Hemisphere leaders over the weekend and upstaged potential efforts to embarrass and castigate the United States over its 50-year embargo against Cuba.

The president was warm to overtures by Cuban President Raul Castro and held out the possibility for real changes; he also disarmed Venezuela’s president, Hugo Chavez, by sprinting across the dance floor to break the ice. As in Europe, as in Mexico, President Obama also talked about a new beginning and said that the United States has made its share of mistakes.

The question is: How soon will action follow all the words?

Antonio Caño of the Madrid newspaper, El País, saw little more than “handshaking and good intentions.” Even that was an accomplishment, he said, compared to disastrous, confrontational meetings during the Bush era. However, he said, the good intentions “will be erased from memory quickly if no there are no quick, recognizable results.”

President Obama’s position on Cuba has to be viewed in context. So far, he’s done little more than roll back restrictions imposed by George W. Bush that limited the ability of Cuban-Americans to visit Cuba or send money to family members. Obama has opened the possibility of licensing telecommunications contacts with Cuba.

In fact, the president hasn’t completely rewound U.S.-Cuban relations to where they had been before the Bush years. It doesn’t take an act of Congress, for example, to quietly resume bilateral talks with Cuba. The president has not reinstated periodic meetings with Cuba as part of a 1995 migration agreement. The meetings, halted by Bush, grew out of decades of periodic chaos caused by Cuban refugees fleeing the island –- sometimes meeting death in the treacherous Florida Straits.

Phillip Brenner, a professor at American University who specializes on Cuban-U.S. relations, told me U.S. overtures so far “will move the two countries towards a normal relationship only a little.”

“Cuban officials rightly view President Obama’s decision as signifying nothing more than fulfillment of a campaign promise to Cuban-Americans.”

He said the U.S. plan on telecommunications with Cuba “was couched in the same language the United States has used for fifty years. They are intended to bring ‘freedom’ to Cubans, which Cuban officials see as code for ‘regime change.’ ”

President Obama has enough problems as he deals with the ongoing economic crisis, and the dire problems of Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Certain to face conservative ire, including a vocal minority in Congress, how much Cuban political capital is the president willing to spend?

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user El_Enigma under a Creative Commons license.

In an online column, the ailing former president Fidel Castro said the U.S. had announced the repeal of “several hateful restrctions,” as he put it. But “of the blockade, which is the cruelest of measures,” said Castro, “not a word was uttered.”

Peter Eisner, who recently spent several weeks in Cuba reporting for the Worldfocus signature series “Cuba After Fidel,” joins Martin Savidge to discuss how these changes will impact the average Cuban, if more changes on the part of the U.S. are expected and if the U.S. will ask the Cuban government for changes.

For a background on U.S.-Cuban relations, listen to our online radio show on Cuba and the U.S., featuring Peter Eisner.

Press coverage of the G-20 Summit in London.

Worldfocus editorial consultant Peter Eisner, the former deputy foreign editor of the Washington Post, discusses what really came out of the G-20 meeting (besides the $1.1 trillion pledged), including Fidel Castro’s positive outlook on U.S.-China relations.

You’d be hard-pressed to figure out — in terms of old-fashioned greenbacks — what exactly came out of the G-20 meeting in London this week. But perhaps warm, fuzzy feelings are all we need.

The stock markets were sharply up at the end of the week, so maybe appearances — and promises — are reality.

Does anybody really know how much money is needed to attack the world recession, and how much of the money pledged by G-20 nations was already en route?

The consensus is that the G-20 leaders pledged $1.1 trillion in total funds. But President Obama said, “Nearly all G-20 nations have acted to stimulate demand, which will total well over $2 trillion in global fiscal expansion.”

And meanwhile, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has also indicated that there’s an escalation clause somewhere, and that the stimulus based on the G-20 agreement will add up to $5 trillion by the end of next year.

No matter the fine print, it sounded good to many.

Jeremy Warner, writing Friday in The Independent, said that “it’s easy to be cynical, but the summit has also achieved something genuinely impressive…For the first time in a long time, there’s reason for optimism.”

Nobel Prize winning economist and columnist Paul Krugman, who has criticized the Obama administration for not pumping enough into the stimulus, is still pessimistic, but wrote that he saw “glimmers of good news — the G-20 summit accomplished more than I thought it would.”

He was writing about that in the context of concern about the Chinese government, which he says “hasn’t yet faced up to the wrenching changes that will be needed to deal with this global crisis.”

And speaking about China, that late entry in the news analysis game, Fidel Castro, also had an optimistic take on the G-20 Summit.

“The experts on economic issues have made a tremendous effort,” Castro wrote on Friday in his occasional column, “Reflections of Fidel,” in Granma, the official Cuban government newspaper.

Castro singled out special praise for Obama and for Chinese President Hu Jintao, who plan to meet soon to discuss a broad range of issues. That he said, may be “one of the most important news items in relation to the G-20 Summit.”

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Soitu.es under a Creative Commons license.

He has held the post as president of the national assembly in Cuba. His influence and prominence are based not only on his longevity but also on his keen analysis of the United States. Alarcón spoke about the Cuban people, U.S.-Cuban relations and the promise of Barack Obama.

Peter Eisner interviewed Alarcón, and Ara Ayer shot the interview.

The change from Fidel to Raúl Castro has allowed for increased political expression, and rap group Anonimo Consejo fills the space of artistic protest, admiring past icons of the revolution while demanding more from their country.

Watch the group’s members explain their role in the Cuban hip-hop movement and rehearse their song “Liberate.” This video was produced by Peter Eisner, shot by Ara Ayer, and edited by Bijan Rezvani.

Pablo Armando Fernandez studied English literature in New York and returned to Cuba after the success of the 1959 revolution. An author of novels and poetry, he found his work celebrated, though it was banned for 10 years. Fernandez shares some thoughts on the revolution and Fidel Castro and recites one of his poems. This video was produced by Peter Eisner, shot by Ara Ayer, and edited by Bijan Rezvani.

But despite significant shifts, many Cubans are still unable to raise their standard of living, report Worldfocus correspondent Peter Eisner and producer Ara Ayer. 

Also, listen to our radio show exploring the roots of U.S.-Cuban relations and potential changes under President Barack Obama.

The Habana Libre hotel in Cuba.

Worldfocus anchor Martin Savidge writes about his experience reporting from Cuba on the Elián González story and recounts a nerve-wracking encounter with the Cuban government.

Jan. 1 marked the 50th anniversary of the Cuban revolution, which we noted in our Worldfocus radio show on Cuba this week. The show looks at the island’s past, present and future.

My connection to Cuba actually began in Panama in November of 1999, when I was covering the handover of the Panama Canal. The day I left, I stepped out of my room and over a newspaper headline that caught my eye: “Cuban boy found in waters off Florida.”

Little did I know, an international soap opera had just begun — one that would consume two nations and much of my reporting life for the next eight months.

The diplomatic tug-of-war over 6-year-old Elián González witnessed a huge role reversal. The U.S. government actually supported the Cuban government and went against the wishes of many Cuban Americans.

For many reporters, the story became one to loathe. Much like the Middle East conflict, the Elián story was highly emotional and very polarizing. I remember covering a rally in Miami by Cuban Americans protesting against returning the boy to his homeland.

At the time, I worked for CNN, which was despised by many in the Cuban-American community because it was seen as favoring Fidel Castro’s regime. This impression was bolstered by the fact that CNN had opened a bureau in Havana. To many in the crowd that night, CNN stood for the “Castro News Network.”

The protest would also lead to one of my favorite oxymorons. A man, very angry with my presence at the demonstration, got in my face and shouted, “The first thing we are going to do when we bring democracy back to Cuba is throw CNN out!” The fact that freedom of the press was one of the basic notions of a democracy didn’t seem to matter.

I ended up spending three months in Cuba, and I will always be grateful to Elián for that. It is a beautiful place, and in many ways unspoiled by over-commercialization. The people are exceptional as is the music, the food and the art. It’s the government I’m not a fan of.

I was reminded why I didn’t like the government the day Elián was seized by U.S. federal authorities from the home of relatives who had been refusing to give him up to go back to Cuba. The phone rang very early in my hotel room at the Habana Libre on April 22, 2000, telling me of the news and to get up to the bureau to start reporting on the Cuban reaction.

The news was all over U.S. cable and television stations, but the average Cuban doesn’t get those, so most were unaware. The only Cubans who did know of the Elián grab were working in hotels like the Habana Libre, where cable television was available for the tourists. So we interviewed a number of employees, including a young woman who said she felt sorry for the little boy because he looked so frightened when federal SWAT members pulled him from the home. Soon, the network began airing our interviews.

A few hours later, another employee came to me. She was very anxious and spoke in whispers. “They have taken her away,” she said.

“Who?” I asked.

“Maria — the one who said she thought Elián was scared.” I was dumbstruck. I should have seen this. Apparently, the Cuban government didn’t approve of her concern for the child’s emotional state, since her words implied a criticism of the U.S. action. Maria was now in the hands of police.

My fear was the propensity for CNN to run interviews on a breaking news story over and over. The more the Cuban government saw her interview, the more they might likely take it out on her and her family. I had to get CNN to stop running it, but I also couldn’t let Cuban government officials know I had been tipped off by the hotel staff.

Normally, this would be a simple phone call to Atlanta. But in Cuba, we believed the office and the hotel were bugged. We talked about what to do amongst the bureau staff on the balcony, hoping to avoid eavesdropping. Finally, we just called CNN and said they had to stop running her bite. “Why? It’s good!” was the answer from the International Desk.

“Just do it…please,” I said. I think it was the combination of begging and the note in my voice that convinced them.

“Okay. Done.”

I saw Maria the next day, much to my relief. She said it had been no big deal. I could tell by her eyes she was lying. Ever since that day, Cuba lost some of its beauty to me.

- Martin Savidge

Jan. 1 marked the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution, when the nation’s U.S.-backed government was overthrown and Fidel Castro took power. A few years later, in 1962, the U.S. instituted a trade embargo against Cuba designed to pressure the communist government.

President Barack Obama has said he plans to ease travel and remittances restrictions for Cuban-Americans, but will keep the embargo in place.

Half a century after the Cuban Revolution of 1959, Worldfocus looks back to the roots of U.S.-Cuban relations and forward to the potentially changing relations under President Obama. Worldfocus.org and anchor Martin Savidge discuss what Americans don’t know about Cuba and the history of American policy.

Martin Savidge hosts a panel of guests to discuss U.S.-Cuban relations:

Peter Eisner is the editorial consultant for Worldfocus and a long-time Latin American foreign correspondent. Peter is a 30-year veteran of international news and has held editorial positions at The Washington Post, Newsday and The Associated Press. Peter is also working on a book about the history of Cuba.

Arturo Lopez-Levy is a lecturer at the University of Denver and the University of Colorado. Born in Cuba, Arturo served in the Cuban army and graduated from the Higher Institute of International Relations in Havana. He then worked as a political analyst for the Cuban government, but resigned after two years and later moved to the U.S. He holds a master’s degree in international affairs from Columbia University and is a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Denver.

Wayne Smith directs the Cuba Program at the Center for International Policy. He is a visiting professor of Latin American Studies and director of the University of Havana exchange program at Johns Hopkins University. During his 25 years with the U.S. State Department, Wayne served as executive secretary of President Kennedy’s Latin American Task Force and chief of mission at the U.S. Interests Section in Havana. In addition, he served in Argentina, Brazil and the Soviet Union.

Associated thumbnail courtesy of Flickr user trailofdead1 under a Creative Commons license.

Credits:
Host: Martin Savidge
Producers: Lisa Biagiotti, Katie Combs and Stephen Puschel

Anthony DePalma, a former New York Times correspondent who reported extensively from Cuba and is the author of the book “The man who invented Fidel,” joins Martin Savidge to discuss where Cuba and American-Cuban relations might be headed under Raul Castro in Cuba and the forthcoming Obama administration in the U.S.

Shannon O’Neil, a specialist on Latin America at the Council on Foreign Relations, speaks with Martin Savidge about Obama’s position on Cuba, the future of relations with Cuba and Venezuela and major trade issues that are currently under review in Congress.