"We have made it very clear to the Cuban Government that the continued detention of Alan Gross is a major impediment to advancing the dialogue between our two countries."

P. J. Crowley, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Public Affairs   December 3, 2010

The detention of Alan Gross shows no public sign of resolution.

During his daily briefing the day before Assistant Secretary. Crowley offered the same old disingenuous spin characterizing Alan as:

a committed international development worker who was arrested by Cuban authorities for his activities, dedicated to helping the Jewish community in Havana connect with other Jewish communities throughout the world....

MR. CROWLEY: He is a contractor and he was trying to help connect communities in Havana to the rest of the world. And obviously, we think that is important for the development of civil society in Cuba.

QUESTION: P.J., what --

QUESTION: So the communications devices that have been mentioned --

MR. CROWLEY: Connecting to the internet.

QUESTION: The internet?

MR. CROWLEY: These are not revolutionary kinds of technology.

QUESTION: When the Secretary hosted Jewish groups several months ago and talked about this, she asked them to make appeals to the Cubans. Are you aware if any of them have?

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, I think we – that’s correct. And I think there have been some contacts. I mean, it’s a broad-based community. I know there have been some suggestions publicly that, well, some groups know about him; some groups don’t know about him. That really is beside the point.

Presumably what Crowley was trying to minimize as "beside the point" is an AP story in which the leaders of the principal Jewish organizations in Cuba contradict his version:

Joe Garcia who might be Representative-elect from Florida if the White House had not been successfully bamboozled by Sen. Menendez and Rep. Wasserman-Schultz with no countervailing pressure.

Mid-term election results were predictable, but nevertheless demoralizing.  They require a drastic reconsideration of strategy to bring about a more normal relationship between the US and Cuba.

Congress

"I am postponing consideration of H.R. 4645 until a time when the Committee will be able to hold the robust and uninterrupted debate this important issue deserves. I firmly believe that when we debate and vote on the merits of this legislation, and I intend for it to be soon, the right to travel will be restored to all Americans.”    --Rep. Howard Berman

For the conceivable future, the House looks like a dead end!  If Representative Berman is unable to bring the travel bill to mark-up during the lame duck session, it is a waste of energy and resources to pay much attention to legislation for at least a year and probably two. 

I hope Representative Jeff Flake is right, that the freshman class of Republicans will include enough libertarian sentiment for him to mount a campaign that can outflank the obstacles created by Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen's control of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.  If that turns out to be the case, his effort merits full support. 

However, while the likely path of defunding OFAC via appropriations is important symbolically and for individual travelers, it has limited if any impact on the travel industry.

The extremism of presumptive committee chair Ros-Lehtinen was manifested in her infamous endorsement of the assassination of Fidel Castro, viewable here.

The White House

The President must be pressed in every conceivable way to deliver completely on the new policy liberalizing non-tourist travel that was approved before Labor Day.  Once that happens, as many people as possible from all eligible categories should be encouraged to travel to Cuba. 

Breaking news:  Senator Christopher Dodd is in Cuba.  Is this a pre-retirement last hurrah as chair of the Western Hemisphere subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee?   Might he be laying the groundwork for a valedictory lame-duck initiative to end travel restrictions?

Radio Marti speculated his visit was connected to resolving the Alan Gross problem.  That's nice to imagine, but seems unlikely unless the US somehow acknowledges that Gross violated Cuban law on three counts (a democracy project funded by USAID, inappropriate use of a tourist visa, providing illegal satellite transmission equipment).

Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations has an excellent op ed published in the International Herald Tribune and on the New York Times web page contrasting change in Cuba with inertia in Washington.  Here is part of it:

In one example, senior political advisers in the White House recently shut down the revival of a Clinton administration “people-to-people” program ­ one approved over the summer by President Obama, his secretary of state and sub-cabinet deputies from throughout the executive branch ­ to allow Americans tied to educational, cultural, religious and other nongovernmental organizations to travel to Cuba. Senate and House Democrats from Florida and New Jersey persuaded President Obama’s political hands to stop the modest opening lest they inflame Cuban-American voters and jeopardize campaign contributions.

Such legislators also fear that by allowing some Americans to travel to Cuba, the White House could strengthen supporters of legislation to lift the entire travel ban, scheduled for a politically decisive vote in the House Foreign Affairs Committee during the lame duck session of Congress. As with the White House, these legislators have lobbied their colleagues in the Congress that such a move will backfire against Democrats in 2010 and 2012 elections.

But their argument is out of date. Cuban-American majorities now support extending their right to travel to all Americans. They are eagerly investing in their families’ small businesses and with all manner of goods they ship down on 30 weekly flights from Miami.

Furthermore, most Cuban-Americans still vote Republican in presidential elections ­ as they did in 2008. And if they vote for the one Cuban-American candidate running for the Senate this fall, it will be on bread and butter issues, not Cuba policy. The perverse and decidedly un-American effect of the administration’s political timidity is that only Cuban-Americans, most of whom don’t even vote for Democrats, can now participate in the changes afoot in Cuba.

We are at a time of testing.  Are the institutions of government in the US finally able to overcome well funded special interest exile politics to chart a rational course with Cuba?

The White House dismally failed the first round.  It generated excitement that it would use executive authority before Congress returned from the August recess to reverse Bush era restrictions on non-tourist travel.  News stories suggested the breadth and administrative implementation of the new policy would go beyond the Clinton era, just as Obama did for Cuban American travel.

Predictable hostility came from the Cuban American quintet in Congress, supported by their indefatigable ally Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, the same people who oppose even unrestricted family travel.  Just as in April 2009, the White House buckled under largely one-sided pressure, this time reportedly after new regulations had actually been approved by the President and the Secretary of State. 

The President’s political advisers decided that opening up dialogue between the people of the US and Cuba would have to wait once again, this time until after the mid-term election on November 2d.  Another opportunity for Presidential leadership was squandered, contributing to further disillusionment in the Democratic base and among independents who had voted for change.

Congress looked to be doing no better.  House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Howard Berman declined to use his authority to cede jurisdiction which would have allowed the travel and ag sales bill to go to a floor vote in July after approval by the Agriculture Committee.  Some feared he would lack the votes and determination to carry the travel section of the bill through his committee.