The Republic: Human Rights in Cuba under Miguel Díaz-Canel
Cuba has a long, incredibly rich history in the context of Western Hemispheric affairs, U.S. history, and Latin American history. Whenever any country is considering a political, economic, national defense/security, foreign policy in the Latin American region, more often than not, Cuban reaction or potential actions are contemplated.
The island nation’s presence in U.S. affairs is immense too. Being the closest Marxist-Socialist nation to the United States, only ninety miles from the Florida Keys, Cuba was heavily discussed throughout the Cold War and, in the 21st century, Cuba is often brought up when discussing Latin American policy or debating how American domestic policies on healthcare are so severely broken.
However, while Cuba has an exemplary (if somewhat flawed) healthcare system, they also are an incredibly repressive and brutal regime with a long list of human rights abuses.
Because of the recent news about Cuba’s massive summer protests and the reaction by Cuba’s government, it is worth examining the nation’s human rights record, especially under the leadership of the first non-Castro family member to head the nation since 1959.
Human Rights in Cuba
Human rights have long been neglected and the indigenous peoples (and general populace) have been abused and degraded for centuries. During the Spanish colonization of the new world, the encomienda system was put into effect almost immediately and a strict racial hierarchy was enacted which placed the White Spaniards on top.
As the rest of the Spanish empire collapsed, Cuba’s grasp on the island’s populace “gradually turned more despotic”. After the 1898 Spanish-American War, American occupied Cuba was not much better than the Spanish Empire; the Cuban people effectively had no autonomy over their finances or other systems and the Cuban leaders were effectively U.S. puppets (most notably Fulgencio Batista).
With the 1959 revolution which brought to power Marxist-Leninists under Fidel and Raul Castro, the Cuban people as a whole enjoyed more freedoms under the Castroite regime. However, there will still abuses that accompanied the revolution.
Immediately following the revolution, multiple persons of high-standing within Batista’s political and military infrastructure were executed. According to a 2005 PBS documentary on the revolution, “as many as 500 [former Batista officials were] executed” though the real number will most likely be unknown.
Throughout the Castro regime, “thousands of Cubans were incarcerated in abysmal prisons, thousands more were harassed and intimidated, and entire generations were denied basic political freedoms” according to the independent NGO Human Rights Watch. The judicial, military, and intelligence system that carried out these actions under Fidel and Raul Castro still exists today under President Miguel Díaz-Canel.
In April of 2018, Miguel Díaz-Canel was elected as the island nation’s first non-Castro President of the Council of Ministers (the executive body of the Republic of Cuba); at the time, Raul Castro remained “the superior guiding force of society and the state”, but this changed in April of 2021 when Raul Castro stepped down as the First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba, with Díaz-Canel taking place.
Díaz-Canel was largely seen as someone who would uphold the Castro party line, yet also was something of a maverick within Cuba; he was seen as a champion of LGBTQ+ rights in his prior political career. In spite of this, many Cubans interviewed in 2018 were unconvinced about any real change occurring within Cuban politics.
Prior to the significant protests Cuba underwent in the Summer of 2021, it was clear that Cuba was not making some shift into become a less totalitarian state under Díaz-Canel. Instead, it appears that things were remaining the same as they had been under Fidel and Raul.
In their 2020 annual report on Cuba, the human rights focused NGO Amnesty International, described a tense situation. They wrote, “Throughout the year there were reports of scarcity of food and other basic goods, leading senior government officials to call on Cubans to grow more of their own food… Authorities continued to clamp down on all forms of dissent, imprisoning political leaders, independent journalists and artists” while noting that the head of a popular political opposition group had been tried and that “The Cuban authorities had prevented the press, the EU and Amnesty International from monitoring his trial”.
Amnesty also reported that Cuba’s freedom of the press still remained increasingly limited with a new lawbeing passed which “appeared to tighten the Cuban government’s network of control and censorship online, especially during the pandemic”. Multiple journalists, both independent and working for Amnesty, were the subject of arrests and fines placed by the Cuban government. In one case, “authorities harassed and intimidated members of the San Isidro Movement – composed of artists, poets, LGBTI activists, academics and independent journalists” seemingly being a reversal of Díaz-Canel’s previous policies towards LGBT+ peoples. The U.S. State Department also found serious violations of international law within Cuba’s state statutes and has rigorously documented the many human rights violations the Cuban government has imposed upon its’ citizenry in 2020.
Much of what both the State Department and Amnesty has reported is very similar to what the Human Rights Watch has previously reported of the Cuban regime in both 2018 and 2020.
In early 2021, however, fractures became even more clear in Cuban society and a monumental change occurred.
The Protests
Heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic, Cuba faced many internal struggles. In September of 2020, “Cuba reported 6,305 cases of Covid-19 and 127 deaths” with the nation reacting quite swiftly, “banning tourists, conducting widespread testing and contact tracing, and implementing mandatory facemask rules and stringent movement restrictions enforced with steep fines or even jail time”. While this had success in combating the virus, this also sent Cuba’s already weakened economy (due to U.S. sanctions) into an even more severe slump, resulting in serious supply shortages; while classes for youth were conducted through online formats, like with various other parts of the world (even in the United States), “Activists and parents complained that classes were often difficult to follow, and that many people were not able to use the homework correction service given the high cost of and limited access to the internet”. Even more troubling, under the guise of COVID mandates, the Cuban government repressed the freedom to organize and the freedom of the press.
All of this build up was significant in leading up to the protests of 2021.
In July of 2021, namely on July 11th, a protest was scheduled to take place in the municipality of San Antonio de los Baños. These protests largely seemed to occur as a direct response to the nation’s internal difficulties (e.g., food/supply shortages, inadequate governance, repression, COVID response, etc.) and took as their slogan of revolution “Patria Y Vida”, the name of a song from a Cuban hip-hop group and a play on the Cuban national motto “Patria O Muerte”.
These protests later spread throughout the nation’s largest cities, largely thanks to social media which allowed videos of protests and government forces clamping down on anti-government protestors to be shared widely.
From July 11th to the 17th, protests occurred and gained incredible traction on social media and galvanized the globe. These protests took on another form, one focusing on a protest of Cuba’s repressive and expansive security apparatus after a protestor was killed by government forces. They were marked by various demonstrations against the Cuban government, some turning violent with protestors, counter protestors, and police being injured.
Multiple reporters were detained, arrested, or attacked by both the government and pro-government and anti-government protestors.
Further into July, the Cuban government began reconsolidating power, with government organized demonstrations taking place. During these demonstrations, Cuban officials, including Díaz-Canel, repeatedly blamed the United States for having started the protests through “aggression and terror”. In the coming months, Cuba began instituting a strong military presence throughout the nation, increasing their armed patrolsof the coastlines after some Cubans began launching fireworks from small rafts and boats in protest and plainclothes police officers went out detaining and harassing protestors. In July, it is estimated that some 130 persons “in 13 of Cuba’s 15 provinces” experienced various human rights abuses “including arbitrary detentions, ill-treatment in detention, and abusive criminal proceedings” as well as allowing the police to engage in activities which hampered one’s ability to peacefully protest or assemble.
This was also only the start of the increased stricter measures put in place by the Cuban regime. In August, the Council of State and Council of Ministers passed Decree-Law 35 (among various others), which mainly focuses on the telecommunications industry in Cuba; basically, the legislative acts state that “…telecommunications users have a duty to prevent the spreading of “fake news or reports” and are forbidden from using the services in ways that affect the “collective security,”… Telecommunications providers, including of internet and phone services and “online applications,” are required to “interrupt,” “suspend,” or “terminate” their services when users allegedly violate these broadly defined duties” while also requiring “telecommunications providers to provide a broad range of information and services to government authorities”.
The legislation also “contains dangerous provisions that label protected speech “incidents of cybersecurity”…the new Cuban legislation instead treats online content as a potential threat to security, including “spreading fake news,” “slander that impacts the prestige of the country,” “inciting protests,” “promoting social indiscipline,” and undermining someone’s fame or self-esteem” something that is rather totalitarian and despotic, yet seemingly in line with what has been seen prior with the Republic of Cuba.
Cubans further began planning to protest again in October, planning on Facebook “a peaceful march in support of civil liberties in the country”, though the Cuban government denied the group the license to march stating, “The protesters ... as well as their links with some subversive organizations ... have the open intention of changing the political system in Cuba…The protests are a provocation and part of a regime change strategy for Cuba tested in other countries”. This letter to the group strongly indicates that Cuba believes these protests to be planned or encouraged by a Western power (most likely the United States) and shows a clear intent to not concede or revamp any of their recent or past legislation. Amnesty International strongly condemned these actions, like most of the rest of the international community.
Most likely in response to these protests, the Cuban government announced “it would conduct annual military exercises on Nov. 18-19, leading up to a day of civilian defense preparedness on Nov. 20…The government’s defense preparations are part of a military doctrine known as the “War of the Whole People” designed to respond to a U.S. invasion. The last day features thousands of civilians evacuating work centers, tending to the wounded, engaged in weapons training and logistical support such as making bullets and cooking”. Naturally, this has multiple uses for the Cubans; it allows them to improve their response time to an invasion from and by the U.S., it allows a nationalistic response by pro-government forces to the anti-government protestors, and serves as a reminder to the protestors that the Cuban military is strong and secure.
Since then, more protests have been planned, yet halted by persons fleeing the country out of fear they would be jailed or harassed. With Cuba’s local and national police forces and state security forces being out in massive numbers, these protests became less infrequent and rare.
What had begun in massive numbers in July seemingly had ended by November with a whimper. However, many Cubans are still fighting against the repressive nature of their government, with activists calling for the release of certain important figures and regular every day Cubans continuing to call for reforms.
The International Reaction
The international community’s reaction to Cuba’s response to the protests was quite immediate. The United States condemned the actions of the Cuban government and stood with the protestors while also imposing new sanctions against individual Cuban leaders and the nation as a whole.
Various other nations also, of varying types, condemned the Cuban government’s actions and expressed sympathy with the protestors, including Mexico, Canada, Ecuador, Chile, Peru, and Uruguay.
Other countries, like Russia, Venezuela, China, and Nicaragua, openly supported the Cuban government and decried the U.S.’ actions in continuing an embargo and increasing sanctions.
Interestingly, many of the countries who did decry the Cuban government’s actions also criticized the United States and the Biden administration for increasing sanctions upon the country and for continuing the measures taken under the Trump administration.
Certainly, it seems there is blame to be shared all around. However, is the criticism against the United States warranted?
The Cuba Embargo
In July, with the protests in full swing throughout Cuba, many commented on the situation and the American response.
One astute observation was made by Camilo Sánchez, a professor of the law at the University of Virginia School of Law and the director of the International Human Rights Clinic. In an interview with UVAToday, Sánchez was asked how the embargo affected Cuba.
Sánchez noted, “The economic embargo on Cuba has unfortunately had enormous negative repercussions on the Cuban people. Even though the United States has allowed Americans to sell agricultural goods and medicine to Cuba for humanitarian reasons since 2000, overall the economic blockade has devastated Cuba’s international trade possibilities, which has had a very serious impact on the enjoyment of the right to food, health and education for Cubans, especially its most vulnerable populations…In the same vein, human rights organizations such as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have repeatedly called on the United States to lift the embargo against Cuba. Moreover, it seems debatable whether this measure has met the objectives for which it was intended. Some critics in fact consider that politically the embargo helps the Cuban regime by providing it with a bogeyman for all of Cuba’s misfortunes. In fact, the government’s narrative regarding the street protests of these days is that they reflect problems caused by the embargo”.
In previous articles written by myself on the U.S. embargo, I have documented how the U.S. embargo against Cuba is itself quite flawed and how many of the United States’ actions in regards to Cuba are based more on biased political views than legitimate security concerns or effective foreign policy.
Writing for the independent research institute the Latin American Bureau, I note that “Lifting the economic sanctions and the travel ban against Cuba, could result in more mutually beneficial economic policies while allowing the Cuban economy to thrive…Working with [Miguel Díaz-Canel] could prove very beneficial in changing the relationship between the United States and Cuba, providing more rights for journalists and the average citizen, and reorienting the overall political/social/economic makeup of the island nation (though this would be a long-term goal). Certainly Cuba has a poor track record with human rights, effectively being an authoritarian police state with no freedom of the press or expression and this is a concern for the US government. Yet, by bringing back some of the policies initiated under President Obama, the United States could, through beneficial economic policies and diplomacy, encourage the Cuban government to abandon or soften these authoritarian policies”.
Conclusion
Naturally, there are problems with trying to rectify the situation in Cuba. Currently, due to the sanctions and the embargo as a whole, the Cuban government and the United States are at odds.
Certainly Cuba needs to significantly revamp much of their governance. Engaging in intense security measures that are despotic and totalitarian, allowing no such dissent from official party lines, and engaging in extensive limitations on free speech and press and the right to assemble are awful policies that do not make for a functioning or socially, economically, or political profitable nation. Dictatorial regimes that engage in repressive behavior are intolerable from a democratic perspective and it is without question that the Republic of Cuba is officially engaging in anti-Democratic measures and are seriously impeding the citizenry from making their own choices and embracing their own freedoms.
The United States, however, also shares a decent portion of the blame for the situation in Cuba. Since the 1960s, the standard policy with Cuba has been to treat them antagonistically and see them as adversaries consistently. While efforts have been made at certain points in history by individual Americans working within the government to try and promote a better relationship, for the most part, on an administrative and official basis, the U.S. government has largely treated the island nation the same. With the Obama administration, efforts were taken to try and “thaw” relations and create a more positive relationship, one not built upon decade old, outdated policies from the Cold War era. However, the Trump administration significantly undid all of the good work performed by Obama’s State Department and Biden’s has not taken a strong initiative on resolving their relationship or trying to make for a better Cuba.
Continuing the sanctions and the total embargo against Cuba while also, through Press Secretaries and official statements made by State Department officials, indicating that there will be no change in Cuba policy and that Cuba is not a priority within the largely context is harmful and accomplishes little.
Cuba’s domestic human rights record is appalling and the United States has routinely, time and time again, criticized the Cuban government for this. However, by lessening the sanctions, removing Cuba from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, and working towards more democratic initiatives by way of food and medical aid, the ability for these two longtime adversaries to try and solve their differences and make for a better relationship and way of life for the Cuban people is very real.
