Some suggest U.S. could improve standing
BY CAROL J. WILLIAMS
Los Angeles Times
Article Last Updated: 04/21/2007 07:51:12 PM CDT
GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba - Fidel Castro wages silent protest against the
U.S. military "tenants" of this bay in southern Cuba from a drawer in
his desk.
There lie 47 uncashed checks drawn on the U.S. Treasury, each for
$4,085, the annual rent fixed in a 1903 lease agreement that has vexed
the Cuban leader since a leftist revolution brought him to power nearly
half a century ago.
The presence of U.S. troops on Cuban soil has long rankled Castro, who,
before taking ill in July and temporarily ceding presidential authority
to his brother Raul, often ranted about the "imperialist occupation" in
speeches and broadcasts.
But would he take it back if Washington offered to tear up the lease today?
Julia Sweig, director of Latin American studies at the Council on
Foreign Relations, pointed out the international outcry over the
Pentagon's use of the base at Guantanamo to detain and prosecute
prisoners held in the U.S.-declared war on terrorism, and she suggested
handing over the property as a possible solution.
"One way to unload the problem would be to give it back to Cuba," she
said. "The question is, would the Cubans want it back?
"Because it's become such a global symbol of what has gone wrong with
America - not just a symbol of our colonial impulses but of the
anti-imperialist fight throughout Latin America - it's something Cuba
uses to greater benefit than getting the base back."
In a report issued last month on Guantanamo's role in the troubled
Advertisement
Click Here!
diplomatic relationship between the U.S. and Cuba, the Council on
Hemispheric Affairs think tank concluded that returning the territory to
Cuba was essential to end the United States' perceived domination of
Latin American neighbors.
During President Bush's trip last month through Latin America, even
friendly leaders reminded him of the message conveyed to the region by
U.S. military occupation of the Cuban territory, said the council's
director, Larry Birns.
"Guantanamo is the symbol of 19th century gunboat diplomacy practiced by
Washington," Birns said. He added that a movement was gaining ground
throughout the Western Hemisphere "questioning the United States'
legitimacy in occupying Guantanamo under the present arrangement."
Caleb McCarry, the Bush administration's point man on a postcommunist
Cuba, said that Guantanamo would be on the table - if and when the
island threw off its one-party regime. The U.S. government gained
control of Guantanamo Bay and its surrounding territory in 1903 under an
agreement between the newly independent Cuban government and its U.S.
liberators after the 1898 Spanish-American War. At the time, the
military wanted a base to position U.S. forces to protect the Panama
Canal, then under construction. The base also played an important role
during the Cold War, allowing U.S. forces to monitor Soviet movements in
the region.
But since the 1991 demise of the Soviet Union and its communist empire
and the 1999 return of the Panama Canal to its host nation, the U.S.
base has lost its strategic significance and now serves as little more
than "a colonial relic," Birns asserted.
The 103-year-old agreement limits use of the Cuban territory to "coaling
and naval purposes only," neither of which appears to cover the prison
or tribunal operations. The agreement also expressly prohibits
"commercial, industrial or other enterprise within said areas," but the
U.S. base now sports a McDonald's, two Starbucks outlets, a Subway
sandwich shop and other American concessions.
Such breaches of the treaty render it voidable, the Council on
Hemispheric Affairs stated in its report urging the U.S. government to
cease its use of Guantanamo against the host country's wishes.
Although U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice have acknowledged publicly that many foreign allies
view the detention center and war crimes tribunal as illegitimate, some
U.S. officials argue that the base remains crucial to American interests
in the region.
"Guantanamo serves a vital role in Caribbean regional security,
protection from narco-trafficking and terrorism, and safeguards against
mass-migration attempts in un-seaworthy craft," said Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey
D. Gordon, a Pentagon spokesman, the latter referring to use of the base
as a refugee camp for intercepted Haitian and Cuban rafters.
Analysts such as Sweig point out, however, that the idea of closing
Guantanamo repeatedly has surfaced over the years during Pentagon
belt-tightening efforts that have led to the closure of nearly 100 other
military bases. Before the January 2002 arrival of the first terrorism
suspects, Guantanamo had dwindled to about 300 military personnel. It
now has more than 8,500.
In the 1996 Helms-Burton Act, also known as the Libertad Act, Washington
offered to open negotiations with a democratically elected Cuban
government aimed at returning Guantanamo or redefining the lease terms
to Havana's satisfaction.
The State Department's acting Cuba desk chief, John Regan, said Havana
had not made an issue of the base, which under the agreement is leased
in perpetuity unless both sides agree to end the arrangement.
"To my knowledge, the Cubans have never officially asked for it back,"
Regan said.
Nor have they raised any objection to the detention mission at the
monthly fence-line meeting of U.S. and Cuban military officials, the
forum at which they were advised of the new role for the base in January
2002, Regan said.
Neither officials in Havana nor Cuban diplomats in Washington responded
to numerous telephone and e-mail requests to express their views on
Guantanamo. But American business, political and cultural figures with
regular contact with Cuban leaders say they have the impression that
Castro's government wants the U.S. military off the island but that the
issue isn't a priority now.
No comments:
Post a Comment