Did the Cuban government make a mistake by shooting down two U.S.-based planes that violated that country's air space February 24? California activist Al Traugott, whose letter was sent to us by reader Kevin Kelley, is by no means the only opponent of U.S. government policy toward Cuba to raise criticisms of the action by the Cuban air force. A statement issued by the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom three days after the event stated, "We join other peace-loving individuals in mourning the deaths of the four men whose plane was shot down." The statement urged the Clinton administration to "refrain from a rush to bellicose action" and instead allow a "thorough investigation."
Likewise, the Cuban American Alliance issued a statement opposing Clinton's announcement of tighter travel restrictions after the incident and stating, "The Alliance is deeply saddened by the loss of three young lives."
"We want to suggest this tragedy is not the time for an escalation of rhetoric, but an opportunity for a fundamental reexamination of U.S. policy toward Cuba," said David McReynolds of the War Resisters League.
I don't think there's reason to mourn for one moment over the right-wing provocateurs who were shot down over Cuban waters. The flight by the "Brothers to the Rescue" was the latest in a 37-year record of military provocations and other acts of aggression by U.S.-based "civilian" counterrevolutionary forces against the Cuban people, all carried out with the complicity and support of Washington. In fact, the tragedy was not what happened but what was averted. Acts of terrorism and aggression by armed, U.S.-based "civilians" have been slowed. Who can doubt that it has now become more difficult to recruit pilots and others to carry out provocations and terrorist acts against the Cuban revolution?
Did shootdown lead to tightening of embargo?
Some U.S. activists have attributed Clinton's decision to
sign the misnamed Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act
(also known as the Helms-Burton act) to the shootdown. An
analysis issued March 16 by the group IFCO-Pastors for Peace
states, "Clinton passed the Helms-Burton bill in a hasty
reaction to unfolding events well before all of the facts were
known. This is not the best way to devise foreign policy." The
group states that the law puts "an important element of U.S.
foreign policy...in the hands of the right-wing Cuban exile
community" in Miami. The embargo is not the best way to "bring
about constructive changes" in Cuba, the statement adds.
But this is a false and dangerously misleading view of how the most powerful imperialist government in history decides a course of action to defend its class interests. Washington and Wall Street didn't "react." They acted. The tightening of the embargo and travel restrictions is not a "hasty" policy, but part of the U.S. rulers' ongoing cold war against Cuba, on which there is overwhelming bipartisan agreement.
The driving force behind this intensified economic warfare against the Cuban people is not counterrevolutionary Cubans in Miami either. It is the capitalist class of the United States, whose holdings were expropriated by the working people in Cuba and who will never forgive or peacefully accept the challenge to capitalist property and prerogatives that the socialist revolution in Cuba represents and the example it provides to millions of toilers around the world. Attempting to economically squeeze, weaken, and ultimately overthrow the revolutionary government of the workers and farmers in Cuba is and has been Washington's unwavering foreign policy goal for 37 years.
Last September, after the House of Representative passed an earlier version of the legislation, a White House spokesperson explained to reporters that the Clinton administration expected "to work hard with the Senate to modify the troublesome aspects of the bill." And that's what they did. The Clinton administration was simply awaiting the appropriate moment to announce its decision to sign the bill and try to justify it in face of U.S. public opinion and opposition of numerous governments internationally.
In a March 19 letter to Cuba activists, Andrés Gómez, a leader of the Antonio Maceo Brigade, made the case well. "It is my understanding and the Brigade's that all public decisions regarding Cuba that have been taken by the Clinton Administration since last Saturday, 24 February, result from a change of policy that has been decided by the Administration previous to the downing of the 2 airplanes." Gómez pointed out that in spite of the tightening of the embargo in 1992, "it was evident that during the past 12 months the Cuban economy was recovering significantly.... At the same time, the Administration had failed to pressure the Cuban government into making concessions that the U.S. has been demanding, especially regarding the country's political system."
Gómez also noted that the Florida-based rightist group had "publicly announced that it intended to once again fly over Havana on February 24 in solidarity with Concilio Cubano's Congress.... Both operations - Concilio Cubano and Brothers to the Rescue - had and have as objectives to gain space for the counterrevolution in Cuba and therefore to debilitate revolutionary power." Concilio Cubano is a coalition of anti- government groups in Cuba that openly acknowledges receiving funding from Brothers to the Rescue and other right-wing groups in Miami. The Cuban government did not permit their planned convention.
Where you stand on these questions is essential for the working class. Do you call for a "better foreign policy" by U.S. imperialism to bring about "constructive change" in Cuba? Or do you stand shoulder to shoulder with working people in Cuba as they defend their sovereignty, independence, and freely chosen socialist course, arms in hand, and in doing so advance the possibilities for workers in other countries to emulate their example?
The Militant stands unequivocally with the Cuban revolution and the action taken by the Cuban government February 24 to defend the first free territory of the Americas.
- NAOMI CRAINE