An overwhelming UN Assembly calls on the US to lift trade embargo on Cuba
Repeating an annual ritual, the UN General Assembly called on Tuesday for the United States to lift its trade embargo against Cuba, whose foreign minister said the blockade against the country was tantamount to “genocide”.
For the 21st year, the assembly's vote was overwhelming, with 188 nations - including most of Washington's closest allies - supporting the embargo resolution, a result virtually unchanged from last year.
Israel, heavily dependent on US backing in the Middle East, and the tiny Pacific state of Palau were the only two countries that supported the United States in opposing the non-binding resolution in the 193-nation assembly. The Pacific states of the Marshall Islands and Micronesia abstained.
President Barack Obama further loosened curbs last year on US travel and remittances to Cuba. He had said he was ready to change Cuba policy but was still waiting for signals from Havana, such as the release of political prisoners and guarantees of basic human rights.
But Obama has not lifted the five-decade-old trade embargo, and the imprisonment of a US contractor in Cuba has halted the thaw in Cuban-US relations.
Havana's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez told the assembly that Cuba had high hopes for Obama when he was first elected in 2008 and welcomed his calls for change. But he said the result had been disappointing.
“The reality is that the last four years have been characterized by the persistent tightening of ... the embargo,” he said.
Rodriguez said the “extraterritoriality” of the blockade measures - the fact that Washington pressures other countries to adhere to the US embargo - violates international law. He added that the blockade is not in US interests and harms its credibility.
“It leads the US to adopt costly double standards,” he said, adding that the embargo has failed to achieve its objectives of pressuring the government to introduce economic and political freedoms and comply with international human rights standards.
“There is no legitimate or moral reason to maintain this embargo that is anchored in the Cold War,” he said.
US envoy Ronald Godard rejected the resolution's call for ending the blockade and Cuba's allegation that the United States was to blame for Cuban financial difficulties. He added that the government in Havana was putting the brakes on Cuba's further development, not the United States.
“It is the Cuban government that continues to deprive them of that aspiration,” he said, adding that Cuba was seeking an “external scapegoat for the island's economic problems.”
Godard said Washington was not punishing the Cuban people. He said 2 billion dollars in remittances were sent from the United States to Cuba last year, while Washington had authorized over 1.2 billion in humanitarian assistance.
He repeated Washington's calls for Cuba to ”immediately release Mr (Alan) Gross,” a US contractor serving a 15-year sentence in Cuba for setting up Internet networks, work that a judge said was a crime against the Cuban state.
Suggested Stories
-
May 22nd 2013
Uruguay: Mujica on a most ambitious mission to China after investments for ports and railways
-
May 22nd 2013
Uruguay joins the women’s presidential club: Mujica flies to China and Astori to Colombia
-
May 22nd 2013
Uruguay’s main problem is high inflation but no policy changes planned, says Astori
-
May 22nd 2013
Alliance of the Pacific promotes meeting with business and finance global leaders
59 comments Feed
Note: Comments do not reflect MercoPress’ opinions. They are the personal view of our users. We wish to keep this as open and unregulated as possible. However, rude or foul language, discriminative comments (based on ethnicity, religion, gender, nationality, sexual orientation or the sort), spamming or any other offensive or inappropriate behaviour will not be tolerated. Please report any inadequate posts to the editor. Comments must be in English. Thank you.
Why do these people use such emotive and unrepresentative comments? All it does is weaken their case (which is VERY good) by trying to make it into a bigger drama.
Should the Falklands now turn around to (Cuba's friend) Argentina and accuse them of “genocide” for their economic blockade?
Cant abide this overly-dramatic form of diplomacy..its puerile.
Having said that: shame on the USA.
They should start with selling toilet paper. A friend emailed me yesterday to tell me there is a terrible shortage and they are rationed to ten sheets per day. Make a note if anyone intends to holiday there. Pack toilet paper!
cuba needs to drag its self into the 21st century.
as for the Americans, sadly you cant demand anything, they do what they wish to do, and no doubt when they decide to lift the trade embargo they will, until then the cubans will just have to carry on.
(1) Has Cuba offered to return the properties of American citizens and corporations that it nationalised?
(2) Has Cuba offered to pay the US$6 billion of financial claims that the US holds against the Cuban government?
(3) Has Alan Goss been released?
(4) In 2010, a bill was apparently introduced in Congress to end the travel ban. What happened to it?
(5) If you were to compare the actions of the U.S. against Cuba to the actions of argieland against the Falkland Islands, which would you say were the more reprehensible?
2-Has Britian paid the USA back for the WWI loan?
3-Alan Goss is my concern, how so? When in Rome.....I go South America twice a year and make sure I follow their laws, my the USA's.
4.Ask the Speaker of the Republican House what happened to H.R. 4645, I am not a Representation.
5.Reprehensible is the only choice of adjective's ...why?
Is trading with a country ruled by a king better than trading with a country ruled by a communist?
Has the US returned sovereign Cuban territory, in other words Guantanamo?
Perhaps they should just wipe the slate clean and start again.
I think both the US and Cuba could benefit from trade, and I think it would hasten Cuba becoming a democracy, which is surely what the US want.
Okay it may not be a US type of democracy, but they could develop a system that works for them.
We, the USA and Europe trade the UAE, Saudis, China and the world traded with South Africa with the white minority repressed the black majority and all these are ok.....yet Cuba is “different”
conqueror is not an American, so he would not be looking to an American democracy. He is still seething over the 13 colonies rebelling against Georgie Porgie
I understand that, but I was trying to illustrate (perhaps badly) that Conquerors posts were banal, stupid and non- productive.
I certainly didn't mean to offend you.
The point is that is all in the past. It's time to look to the future.
Democracy will happen quicker if the people of Cuba can see all the benefits of democracy, and capitalism. As with any system of government there will be downsides, but I believe that the problems of democracy are far outweighed by the benefits do democracy.
Only the crows laugh it let alone human.
So ........Cuba is part American as well.
The US does not 'own' Cuba now and never will in the future. Puerto Rico is a US Overseas Territory and is likely to remain so. (The recent vote was poorly supported and will change nothing).
The way forward is to trade with Cuba. The problem is the anti-Cuba lobby is strong in the US. Will a President be brave enough to make the change? And regarding property rights, almost the entire wealth and reserves of the island left Cuba with the exiles during the revolution. It is probably time to draw a line under it.
We can influence positively.
Ww1 loan is paid we believe.
2, one voice cannot be accountable for its silly government position, stance , or policies,
We brits , no unlike the American people also suffer idiotic stupid crass decisions from our own silly government.
But the past, although referred to often, should remain only for reference and to stop making any future mistakes,
Cuba will one day join the rest of society,
When that day comes, perhaps we will all see what she is to become,.
But one things for sure,
Cuba has a lot of catching up to do,
Ive never been there but they say her infrastructure is about 50 years behind,
So investors may well be attracted there.
just a thought..
Poppy you make yourself sound reasonable.But how in these times can you transfer passed times to the present as any justification for anything.Cuba was never anything to do with USA in a democratic world.You are talking about the days of colonialism and expansion which today is seen as nothing to be proud of and neither should you try to use such methods as a justification for your countries attitude to a liberation struggle at a later period in history.
The USA is free to trade with who they like but to threatened not to trade with a country if it trades with Cuba is a political policy and not an economic or business decision but a coercive action.
I do believe the phase I used was...“use to own” and yes we did when we purchased it outright from control from Spain. Guantanamo Bay was seceded to the USA are a condition of Cuba's indepdenence. We wanted to Bay for strategic purposes for Panama Canal.
Purhaps Cuba should use bidets like thew Argentines.
As for Puerto Rico, to become a state, they need to convince both houses in congress. I do not even want them as a territory. Queen kirchner is looking for an island, she can have them.
@7 Guantanamo Bay was leased following the Cuban-American Treaty of 1903. Post the Cuban Revolution, Cuba ratified the treaty and cashed the rental cheque. The Cuban-American Treaty gave, among other things, the Republic of Cuba ultimate sovereignty over Guantánamo Bay while granting the United States “complete jurisdiction and control” of the area for coaling and naval stations. The lease is “perpetual”.
@8 “seething over the 13 colonies rebelling”. Haven't done much with them, have you? How are the Amerindians getting on? Given them back their land, have you?
@9 The “people of Cuba” are perfectly capable of seeing “the benefits of democracy”. All they have to do is travel abroad, watch TV programmes or use the internet. It's not rocket science. Do you think that searching out information and making up their own minds is beyond them?
@12 What happened to the Cuban-American Treaty? Wasn't that signed by the first president of Cuba, Tomás Estrada Palma? Spanish, was he? President from 1902 to 1906, wasn't he?
@15 I have been there and it is way behind with infrastructure. There is almost no internet or mobile phones. But there are positives too. Cuba had to become independent after the collapse of the Soviet Union and they can produce enough food to feed their population. They can't afford the pesticides so their produce is organic. They trade medical care for oil with Venezuela. The population is generally fit and healthy and well-educated. And Havana is stunningly beautiful and preserved. They have also started to develop a good tourism industry retaining a 50% share in every hotel. I saw a lot of rich Russians, English and Canadians when I was there a few years ago.
The downside is the endless shortages, no disposable income and a lack of freedom. Young Cubans, in particular, want change but they do not want to be apart of the US. Like most countries they are proud to be Cuban.
What I find really interesting is that Cuba is getting ready to come out of the communist model whereas Venezuela seems to be anxious to impose it.
A friend of mine is in Cuba at the moment and she reported 'cold brussels sprouts for breakfast and a shortage of toilet paper' LOL!
I am very doubtful the Castro brothers are US men.
please don't tell me Russia-Cuba interrelations, Russians gave nothing to Cuba.
I agree,
She has a lot to do,
Time will tell.
.
I didn't say that you said the Castros are US men
only my doubt.
Where you asking my opinion or asking for information you did not know? “can you answer the following questions” hardly conveys as an query for information as it does a test.
I think we've managed quite well Reminds me of that guys that killed his ex wife, you jknow the one that married Carmilla....oh yes Chucky. When he came and visited Willaimsburg...asked the same thing. Cheeky old fellow ....eh?
BTW, w turned them thar 13 colonies into 50 sovereign states after we did a little house cleaning and sent your god, lord cornwallis home 231 years ago.....postage due. But thanks for asking.
Now about that 4.4 billion in WWI dollars, ever think you will pay it? Or will you Kirchner it?
Captain
What is this panic !...you talk with whom
I only said that -- my doubt is that the Castro brothers are US men --that's all...
everybody knows that CaptainPoppy is one of the names of Conqueror.
I know too many people who have both US and British passports.
bu you cannot ignore the History...
Captain J.Cook was a Conqueror !...wasn't he ?
Cook was a military man and military carry out their country's orders.....plain and simple. He was a leading explorer and navigator of his time. Bligh by far proved to be the greatest maritime navigator of all time. That being said, I would call Cook an explorer.....not a conqueror.
But Captain Cook was killed..
however the explorers are not killed but conquerors can be killed
so Pizarro and Cook were the same kinds of men as conquerors.
MistyThink,,,the undertaker…
As the local gunslinger said,
This town aint big enough for the both of us,
Go for ya gun.
Only one will walk away.
Your call.
Night night.
justa gunslinging joka.
The Spanairds were conquerors
The Vikings were conquerors, the Huns, and many others.
Very well stated. It's only ruthless self-love that leads the US to try and starve certain nations, at the very same time it trades with others with much worse record regarding obedience to international law. And it's by means of ruthless hypocrisy that the US cloaks its attempts to bring down entire nations through sanctions by using terms like 'human rights', 'freedom', and 'democracy'. The mention of apartheid South Africa was very clever. While the socialist leadership of Cuba was trying hard to enable the rise of its people (White, Black and otherwise) from poverty, in South Africa a tyrannical minority worked to exclude the poor, Black majority from political life and pushed it towards poverty by seizing its lands. Yet the US was embargoing Cuba much before it did apartheid South Africa; it was Cuba who was first accused of violating the principles of freedom. What is this if not evidence of ruthless self-interest on the US's part?
Cuba still represses it's people in political speech, opportunity and even simple travel. What country requires permission to leave it's own country? And while Alan Goss stupidly had equipment that can be construed as espionage material, he is obviously an innocent man being held by a repressively obsolete country. My simple position is to end the embargo and let American business in.
No. m.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/09/splendor-amid-poverty-gallery-nights-with-cubas-gilded-elite/261956/
About the goods the US has done to the world, I'd like to hear more about it. Me, I think the US legacy was set to be negative from the beginning, with its shameful performance in WW2. To that, it added a history of state-terror in Southeast Asia, Central America and the Middle East. And I know of no good that outweighs all of the suffering it has caused. The US's lasting legacy as a short-term superpower will be its revolting, hypocritical use of human rights rhetoric to disguise unwarranted violence.
Let's put aid in context; it is of little cost to the giver and of little impact for the recipient. What has more of a long-term effect for a nation is the macro-economy. And US aid to, for example, Haiti in the wake of last year's earthquake, doesn't even begin to compensate for the fact that, as Bill Clinton has admitted, the US pushed Haiti to adopt disastrous macro-economic policies of free market that opened the doors of Haitian market to US farmers at the expense of Haiti's indigenous agriculture, which was destroyed in the process. US aid to Haiti doesn't compensate either for the fact that the US is forcing that country to remain as much of a low-wage piss poor country as possible. (www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6 )
I could take the day given more examples of such ambiguity on the part of the US, but I think you get my point. Aid is good, aid increases the giver's soft power and improves its image. But economics and geopolitics are another matter entirely, and when it comes to these, the US is as much of a son-of-a-bitch self-interested country as any empire before it.
You are measuring the US Government aid (expenditures)to GDP....correct? That means you are measuring what the governement spends in relation to what everyone, including private citizens spend. Not exactly what I call comparing apples to apples. I suggest then you make an change to what and who is spending or what your are comparing to.
To measure the USA governments aide worldwide, measure it against the governments total expenditures. Measuring the USA's worldwide aid against a GDP is like measuring my charitable contributions in relation to how much everyone in my neighborhood earns and spends in total. I am sure your “google” source and “wiki” source tells you that that is the measurement.
If you do use the measure in relation to GDP, then you also need to include how much US citizens give as well. Afterall, the GDP includes their incomes and expenditures also. I think you get my point that you are including x on one side on the equation....governemnt expenditures on foreign aid, yet of the other side you are also inclsuding x,y and z. Apples and oranges. If you compare the nation as a whole, compare not onlt what the government spends but also what the citizens donate.
and we are not keen on the man....
but,with its shameful performance in WW2.
a bit unfair here, the yanks fought just as well as the rest of the allies,
the brits canacks aussies all did their part,
we are not aware of any shamfull acts by the Americans,
please enlighten.
just a thought.
But in general terms, the Americans, Brits and all the rest of the Allies acted relatively honorable when you consider that the Germans were systematically exterminating not enemy combatants, but a race and group of people they felt were so inferior they had not right to life. What can you compare on such a widespread level to that?
my uncle bearly survived one of their camps.
...........
perhaps 41 should consider that.
#41 appears to use (no quotable stats) wikipedia(dubious source at it's best) stats that work for him. As people that work with numbers always say, numbers by themself are meaningless.
PS
I really can't understand for the life on me why they think I and Conqueror are one of the same. Him and I have had our own pissing match. He can't seem to realize that I am a staunch supporter of the UK and yet he still wishes to came at me for Obama's policies that he does not like. He needs to realize regardless of what my president thinks, he still needs congressional approval for most anything he does.
In a neo-liberal country gvt expenditure should be less than in a social democratic country.So you can search in vain for a benchmark to measure the level of aid and how generous it is but GDP is as good as any.
Drifting off into your own thoughts on the psychological effects of killing people is not relevant unless you are subconsciously prompted to the matter when you are quietly reflecting on the USA's impact in its foreign policy.I don't believe it has saved the life or improved the life of anyone in Cuba in the past 50 years,has it?
My own thoughts are nothing to do with Cuba as it was to do with the comment that America acted shamelessly in WWII, a digression of the article. But more important, is the USA suppose to save or improve the lives of anyoine other than it's own citizens, is that not the role of a countries's leader?
While I do not portend to agree with all my countries foreign policy, neither do I disagree also. Cuba was created by the Castro boys and they need to live by the promises of paradise they still to this day believe they have, even though their citizens cannot live the island.
You ónly-always twaddle in rhetorícal séntences.
also don't have ány idéa -- ópinion.
Not as much government (though our gov supply half the food aid in the world).
We have the lowest taxes in the developed world and the most freedom, so why would you would expect GUBERNMENT aid figures to correlate-that's lol.
Ayayay, what makes us a bit different in taxzation is that we are a hodge podge of taxes.....local taxes, state taxes, federal taxes......excise taxes, income taxes, sales taxes. I would love to see one tax at the lowest, local level. Then the local government can pay the state for it's affiliation and then the state pay the fed for it's union.....we do it backwards. Most goes to thje feds, less to the state and the least to the locals.
Americans are the most charitable people, PER PERSON, of all the countries in the world.
Ranked #1, (moving up five places!) in the World Giving Index 2011: www.cafonline.org/publications/2011-publications/world-giving-index-2011.aspx
thats about, [ $20,670,000,000
] dollars a year.
and that is far to much, considering most of it is wasted and nicked..
We gave, as a government, just over 56 billion this past fiscal year, 16 of which was military. That still leaves 40 billion, not counting the citizen donations that you claim do not count. How much did the other countries provide in RAW DOLLARS. When it comes down to it....the total dollars given matters more than the percent of GNP. Dollars....total dollars help other countries more than percentages. Denmark ranks as the highest percent of GNP......yet it amounts to barely 3 billion dollars. Do you really think that 3 versus 56 billion makes more impact?
Again, how much did your country provide in dollars Yuleno?
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!