![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.cubasupport.ie\/latest\/wp-content\/uploads\/Revolution_Square.jpeg?resize=640%2C428&ssl=1\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nAs the Cuban government celebrates the July 26 Day of the National Rebellion \u2014 a public holiday commemorating the 1953 attack on the Moncada Barracks that is considered the precursor to the 1959 revolution \u2014 U.S. groups are calling on the Biden administration to end the cruel sanctions that are creating such hardship for the Cuban people. In particular, they are pushing President Biden<\/a> to take Cuba off the list of state sponsors of terrorism. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Being on this list subjects Cuba to a series of devastating international financial restrictions. It is illegal for U.S. banks to process transactions to Cuba, but U.S. sanctions also have an\u00a0unlawful<\/a>\u00a0extraterritorial reach.\u00a0 Fearful of getting in the crosshairs of U.S. regulations, most Western banks have also\u00a0stopped<\/a>\u00a0processing transactions involving Cuba or have implemented new layers of compliance. This has hampered everything from imports to humanitarian aid to development assistance, and has\u00a0sparked<\/a>\u00a0a new European campaign to challenge their banks’ compliance with U.S. sanctions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These banking restrictions and Trump-era sanctions, together with the economic fallout from COVID-19, have led to a severe humanitarian and economic crisis for the very Cuban people the Biden administration claims to support. They are also a major cause of the recent increase in migration of Cubans that has become a major political liability for the administration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the beginning of Biden’s presidency, he stated that Cuba’s designation on this list was\u00a0under review<\/a>. Eighteen months later, with the administration obviously more concerned about Florida politics than the welfare of the Cuban people, the results of this review have still not been revealed.\u00a0 Cuba remains on the list, with no justification and despite Biden and his foreign policy officials repeated hailing diplomacy \u2014 not escalation of tension and conflict \u2014 as this administration’s preferred path.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the Obama administration, when there was a warming of bilateral relations with Cuba, the White House undertook its own review and certified that the government of Cuba was not supporting terrorism and had provided the U.S. with assurances that it would not do so in the future. As a result, Cuba was taken off<\/a> the infamous list.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When Donald Trump became president, he not only imposed over 200 harsh new sanctions on the island, but in the last days of his administration, in a final move to curry favor with anti-normalisation Cuban-Americans, he\u00a0added<\/a>\u00a0Cuba back onto this list. The only other countries with this designation are Syria, Iran and North Korea.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The addition of Cuba to the list by then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo curtailed a process of congressional consultation<\/a> and avoided conducting any actual formal review of Cuba’s supposed actions to justify its addition to the list again. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The nonsensical rationale by Pompeo\u00a0was<\/a>\u00a0that Cuba was granting safe harbor to Colombian terrorists. But these Colombian groups were in Cuba as part of an internationally recognized process of peace negotiations that the U.S., Norway, Colombia and even Pope Francis supported.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Trump specifically cited<\/a> Cuba’s refusal to extradite 10 members of the ELN (National Liberation Army), as requested during Colombia’s Ivan Duque administration. But Cuba was under no obligation to extradite anyone, as it has no extradition treaty with the U.S., nor is the failure to extradite someone solely because the U.S. wants them an act of “terrorism.” In addition, Colombia’s constitution states<\/a> that “extradition shall not be granted for a political crime.” Moreover, Gustavo Petro, a former member of another rebel group called M-19, will soon be inaugurated as the next president of Colombia. He has said<\/a> to the ELN and all existing armed groups that “the time for peace has come” \u2014 a message the Biden administration should embrace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2020 the Trump administration claimed that Cuba harbors U.S. fugitives from justice \u2014 but all three cases cited by the State Department involve political incidents almost 50 years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The other reason stated by the Trump administration for adding Cuba to the list is that the Cuban government harbors U.S. fugitives from justice. The 2020 State Department report cited<\/a> three cases, all involving incidents from the early 1970s. The most famous is the case of Assata Shakur (born Joanne Chesimard), who has become an icon of the Black Lives Matter movement. Shakur, now 75 years old, was a member of the Black Liberation Army. In a trial that many deemed<\/a> unfair, she was convicted of killing a state trooper when, in 1973, the car she was traveling in was stopped on the New Jersey Turnpike for a broken taillight. Shakur escaped from prison and was granted political asylum in Cuba. Fidel Castro called her<\/a> a victim of “the fierce repression against the Black movement in the United States” and “a true political prisoner.” Her co-defendant Sundiata Acoli, now in his mid-80s, was granted parole this year. Given how old these claims are and the fact that these considerations were previously reviewed by the Obama administration and not found sufficient to justify designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, it’s certainly time for the Biden administration to remember that and bury the hatchet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In any case, U.S. attorney Robert Muse\u00a0insists<\/a>\u00a0that providing asylum to U.S. citizens does not justify putting Cuba on a terrorist list. U.S. law defines international terrorism as “acts involving the citizens or the territory of more than one country.” None of the U.S. citizens residing in Cuba committed a terrorist act that was international in nature.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Using this terrorist list for purely political reasons undermines the legitimacy of the terrorism designation itself. As Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,\u00a0said<\/a>, “This blatantly politicised designation makes a mockery of what had been a credible, objective measure of a foreign government’s active support for terrorism.\u00a0 Nothing remotely like that exists [in Cuba].” On the contrary, Cuba has often been praised for its international cooperation and solidarity, especially in providing free or low-cost health care and medical support to poor countries worldwide, including throughout the\u00a0global pandemic<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n If anything, it is Cuba that has been the victim of international terrorism, emanating mainly from the United States. This ranges from the 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion and hundreds of assassination attempts against Fidel Castro to the downing of a Cuban civilian airplane (the attacker in that case was provided cover by the U.S., and lived out his life peacefully in Miami) and the bombing of Cuban hotels. Just last April, the Cuban embassy in Washington\u00a0came under<\/a>\u00a0an armed attack by a U.S. citizen.\u00a0 The U.S. continues to provide millions of dollars in taxpayer funding every year to organisations engaged in defamation and smear campaigns against Cuba, and to directly undermine the sovereignty of another government with little to no oversight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Removing Cuba from the terrorist list would\u00a0facilitate<\/a>\u00a0the island’s ability to receive loans, access critical foreign assistance and benefit from humanitarian aid. This\u00a0outrageous Trump-era designation is unjust, harmful to the Cuban people and damaging to U.S.-Cuban relations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n By\u00a0MEDEA BENJAMIN\u00a0–\u00a0NATASHA LYCIA ORA BANNAN
\n\n\n\n
source: salon.com<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"