Maggie Schuss. Published Monday, March 5, 2001, in the
Miami Herald
Dr. Anthony F. Kirkpatrick, in his Feb. 28 column, U.S. shares the blame,
has spread misinformation about Brothers to the Rescue and its founder José
Basulto. Unfortunately, Federal Judge Joan Lenard, presiding in the trial of the
accused Cuban spies, has barred Basulto from making "extrajudicial
statements and conduct intended to influence public opinion or the jury
regarding the merits of the case.''
The Cuban government and its lackeys have no such gag, however. Ricardo
Alarcón, head of the Cuban National Assembly, recently was quoted in The
Herald saying the Brothers planes [attacked by Cuban MiGs in 1996] were shot
down in Cuban territorial airspace. This is misinformation, refuted by The
Herald's own recent editorial.
Also, defense attorneys have converted the trial against five indicted Cuban
spies into a trial against Brothers -- one in which Brothers cannot offer its
own witnesses, testimony or evidence. I then must clarify some of the most
egregious items of misinformation:
The area south of the 24th parallel -- in which Brothers has flown more
than 1,800 search-and-rescue missions and where it flew on the day of the shoot
down -- is international air space. Cuba only coordinates air traffic over this
area. It is not over Cuban territorial water, and Cuba has no right to scare
anyone away from flying there.
On Feb. 24, 1996, Brothers received a warning that that area was an "activated
area.'' It had received that same threat multiple times from Cuba, which tried
to prevent the group from conducting its life-saving missions. Had Brothers
abided, many rafters would have perished at sea. In fact, on the day of the
shoot down, a commercial aircraft that heard the warning to Brothers asked Cuban
air-traffic controllers what area was activated -- because the same warning had
not been issued to it, though it was in the same area.
Brothers did not deviate from its flight plan. Also, it was not required to
file a flight plan as its plans that day didn't include landing outside the
United States. Yet it filed its flight plan on that day as previously agreed
with the Federal Aviation Administration. That was to allow the FAA to track
Brothers planes at all times (and the FAA typically transmitted the flight plan
to Cuba).
Kirkpatrick suggests something significant by the fact that the Brothers
planes "were heading directly toward Havana instead of along the coastline
of Cuba as they had promised.'' How were they to fly parallel to the coast if
they didn't head south first toward Havana, as they stated they would do?
Brothers flight plans are for an area of operation, not for a specific
direction.
The U.S. government never warned Brothers that the Cuban government would
shoot them down if they entered Cuban territorial airspace. Even if they had,
what good would that have done? The planes were shot down in international
airspace.
The argument that the United States would take similar action if a known
enemy in a small, private plane was to enter U.S. airspace heading toward
Washington, D.C., is nonsense. The Cuban government had the Brothers flight
plan; it shot down the first aircraft miles outside of Cuban territorial air
space without even attempting to communicate with its pilot.
When Basulto told Cuban air-traffic controllers that he would fly along the
coast of Cuba, the tower acknowledged him but did not warn of any danger. The
controllers knew where the Brothers planes were as they squawked a transponder
code readable by Cuban radar and previously given to Cuba by the FAA.
Cuban MiGs shot down Brothers' planes in international waters.
All the leaflets, containing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
thrown from Brothers planes toward Cuba were released from international
airspace.
On July 13, 1995, Brothers participated in a peaceful flotilla in
remembrance of the Castro regime's sinking of the tugboat 13 de Marzo, in which
more than 40 people including many children were killed. During the flotilla,
two Cuban gunboats under command planes flying overhead rammed the lead boat,
the Democracia. In hopes of diverting the command planes, Basulto flew toward
Havana. The diversion worked, and the Democracia escaped.
To characterize the saving of human lives and the dropping of leaflets,
bumper stickers, flowers and religious medals as "acts of aggression'' by "terrorists''
is far fetched to say the least. But when you are grasping at straws and your
victim cannot object, everything is fair game.
Maggie Schuss is a director of Brothers to the Rescue.
Kirkpatrick's article following:
In Brothers To The Rescue Shootdown: U.S. shares the blame
Anthony F. Kirkpatrick. Published Wednesday, February 28,
2001, in the Miami Herald
Last Thanksgiving Day I flew my small plane to Cuba loaded with medical
donations from the United States. To get permission, I had to overcome
considerable nervousness from Cuban authorities. They feared my flight would
open a way for more U.S.-sponsored provocation by private pilots, such as the
events that led to the shootdown of two planes by Cuba in 1996.
Although a United Nations investigation faulted Cuba for not using means,
such as more-effective radio communication, to avoid the shootdown, what has not
been widely re- ported is how the U.S. government might have prevented the
shootdown by enforcing its own laws. Now, five years later, the case is in a
Miami courtroom, where defense attorney Paul McKenna says that his client,
accused Cuban spy Gerardo Hernán- dez, is a scapegoat in the shootdown
and that José Basulto, the leader of the Brothers to the Rescue, is
really to blame. If convicted, Hernández could receive a life sentence.
ILLEGAL EXPLOITS
The American public deserves to know all the facts about the shootdown. On
July 11, 1995, the Federal Aviation Administration met with Basulto and warned
him that if he violated Cubas territorial airspace, he would suffer "serious
consequences'' and that any violations would be "vigorously investigated.''
Yet two days later, Basulto was on Miami television bragging about his illegal
exploits, calling them "civil disobedience.''
Viewers saw him "roaring over Havana at rooftop level,'' as described
by the on-board TV reporter, dropping propaganda leaflets and religious medals,
which seriously could have injured people below. A Cuban fighter plane flying
above him took no action, even though Basulto was flying in a manner later
described by the FAA as reckless or careless "so as to endanger the life
and property'' of others.
Unfortunately, the FAA failed to carry out any of its warnings. For example,
it delayed the investigation for more than a month while it translated Cubas
documentation of the incident, and it never contacted the journalist on board
Basultos plane.
We may never know if the tragic shootdown seven months later might have been
averted had the FAA exercised its authority to revoke Basulto's pilot's license
or seize his aircraft. Despite Cubas numerous warnings that it would shoot down
any intruding aircraft, the Brothers continued their efforts to destabilize the
Cuban government by flying into airspace controlled by Cuba and dropping
political leaflets into the island.
TOWARD HAVANA
On that ill-fated day, the pilots deviated from their filed flight plan
without notifying the aviation authorities. This deviation in flight plan made
the Cubans nervous because the aircraft were heading directly toward Havana
instead of along the coastline of Cuba as they had promised.
According to the U.N. report, the pilots acknowledged that they were warned
in Miami through the FAA and in the air by the Cubans that they would be flying
into airspace under Cuban control and "activated'' by Cuban military during
that period. Although all three aircraft were equipped with sophisticated GPS
navigational systems, they intruded directly into the activated area.
Basulto told the U.N. investigators that he did not violate Cuba's
territorial airspace, but the U.N. report states that radar recordings from both
countries showed otherwise. Basulto managed to evade a shootdown by the Cuban
military aircraft, but the other two aircraft were not as fortunate.
Rather than point the finger at the Brothers or the FAA for the shootdown,
the United States called on the U.N. to condemn Cuba, citing a provision calling
for countries to refrain from using weapons against civil aircraft. That same
provision was used to condemn the United States in 1988 for shooting down an
Iranian airliner, killing 290 passengers.
But the United States itself refuses to ratify the provision. Why? It would
require this country to prevent private pilots from using their aircraft to
carry out acts of aggression against other nations. Cuba ratified the provision
on Sept. 28, 1998.
What if the table were turned? Suppose that a known enemy from abroad was to
enter U.S. airspace in a small private plane heading toward Washington, D.C. As
several "administration officials'' told The Washington Post, such an
intruder is likely to be shot down quickly over water before it enters the
United States because shooting down the plane over a populated area would create
"significant risks to large numbers of innocent bystanders.''
Like the aviation incident, the United States is two-faced on health care,
too.
Why did I fly more than $1 million in medical donations to Cuba? Like the
aviation incident, the United States is two-faced about health care as well.
The U.S. embargo prevents about half of the most vital medicines from
reaching the Cuban people. In a letter dated Feb. 17, 1995, one year before the
shootdown, the Organization of American States called the medical embargo a
direct violation of international law. Our country is saying to the world, "Do
as I say -- not as I do.''
Anthony F. Kirkpatrick is a physician and pilot in Tampa.
Copyright 2001 Miami Herald | 