By Pedro Pablo Álvarez Ramos And Héctor
Palacios Ruíz. The New York
Times. June 18, 2001
HAVANA — The news recently arrived here of the Helms-Lieberman Cuban
Solidarity Act of 2001, which would allocate $100 million in aid —
financial assistance, medical supplies, office and communications equipment —
to Cuban independent and nongovernmental organizations and victims of political
repression. While we do not doubt that the intention of the legislators is to "provide
increased, decisive support to the democratic opposition in Cuba," we feel
that Cuban dissidents on the island have to say: "No, thank you. Not in
this way."
Those of us in Cuba who are trying to work independently of the state are
often, and falsely, accused by the government of being on the payroll of the
United States. To accept would simply fuel these accusations.
The Cuban government represses those who lead independent activities,
whether in human rights advocacy, journalism or independent libraries. Receiving
aid often gets the recipient into trouble, even though it comes from sources
other than the United States. One of us, the general secretary of the Unitary
Council of Cuban Workers, recently spent over three months in prison because
$5,000 destined for a congress of independent trade unions was found at his
apartment. (The money, from the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions the
Netherlands, was confiscated by state security.)
Further, 1999 legislation changed the Cuban Penal Code so that anyone "receiving,
distributing or participating in the distribution of financial, material or
other means coming from the U.S. government," if such means were aimed at
enforcing the Helms-Burton law, the embargo or "the economic war," can
be punished with up to 20 years of imprisonment.
Activists like us are under constant scrutiny by state security and by the
local committees for the defense of the revolution. The difficulties of bringing
us aid were illustrated by the detention in Havana earlier this year of two
Czechs — supporters of independent Cuban civil society — who were here
with material and moral support. One Cuban activist, a blind man, was physically
abused by state security agents because he was on the list of people whom the
two Czechs were planning to visit.
American legislators point out that assistance provided by the United States
government once helped dissidents in Poland. But that aid effort was revealed
only once democratic changes had happened there. Besides, Poland is a country
with land borders, which make all sorts of communication from outside easier
than it is on an island.
If some Cuban dissidents were to accept American aid while others did not,
the aid would divide those who favor democratic change into haves and have-nots
and would give the official propaganda machinery reason to accuse us all of
being mercenaries or parasites.
The approval of such an aid package also might paralyze the growth of Cuban
civil society in a less obvious way. The announcement itself led some to say, "Why
spend energy on launching this or that project, when the manna will soon fall
from the sky?"
Perhaps some of these reasons can help explain why Fidel Castro, when asked
about the Helms-Lieberman act during a visit to Portugal, said, "It's an
excellent idea," adding that the act showed some of his opponents in
Washington "don't use their heads much."
Of course, we cannot pretend to speak for the entire independent sector of
Cuba. But we know that other prominent representatives of our community have
expressed similar reservations about the proposal. Perhaps our voices will be
heard and taken into account in Washington.
Pedro Pablo Álvarez Ramos is general secretary of the Unitary
Council of Cuban Workers. Héctor Palacios Ruíz is director of the
Center of Independent Social Studies.
Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company | 
