Interview with the Head of the US Embassy in Cuba
Granting visas is an issue “we must resolve”.
HAVANA TIMES – We interviewed Timothy Zuniga-Brown, the Chargé d’Affaires at the US Embassy in Cuba since July 31, 2020. He is the highest ranking officer in the absence of an ambassador.
Before landing in Havana, Zuniga-Brown had been the coordinator of the State Department’s Office of Cuban Affairs. He was also the US Consul in Monterrey, Mexico, and the Deputy Chief of Mission in Ecuador. His thirty-year diplomat career includes posts in the Bahamas, Peru, Panama, South Africa and New Zealand.
One of the hosts of our podcast, Camilo Condis, asked the public official to talk a little bit about the current state of US-Cuba relations. In response, Zuniga-Brown said that relations are, as always, complicated.
He noted that during the current COVID-19 outbreak, relations have become more tense. Zuniga offered his best wishes, hoping “that everyone is OK and that those who unfortunately caught COVID-19, recover soon.”
Condis thanked the diplomat and immediately asked about the embargo (which the Cuban government calls a blockade). This issue is always on the table when we talk about relations between these two countries.
Do you believe this economic embargo has reached or is reaching its objective, 58 years later?
Zúñiga-Brown: That’s an excellent question. I knew you were going to ask about it and it’s something that is normally discussed. Talking about the embargo is like jumping to the middle of a conversation. Often, one talks about what’s happened in the past 58, 59 years, dating back to the ‘60s. We don’t have to go back so far in time, because that would be arguing history. It’s quite a complicated puzzle.
Just look back a year ago to the Constitution that came into force in Cuba, in 2019. I tell those at the Embassy to pay close attention to what each of the articles stipulates, especially Article 5. It states: “The Cuban Communist Party is the sole party,” and it seems that this issue is irrevocable too. It’s a Communist Party that governs the State and society too, which is to say, it’s a totalitarian system.
This is what the embargo brings to heel, focusing on limiting the flow of capital to the coffers of the Government, Ministry of Interior and the Armed Forces. This is why there is an embargo. Often people say that it affects them directly; I understand that.
However, what we are trying to do is to stop what is happening here in Cuba when the State takes totalitarian action, which, quite frankly, is against the Cuban people. Likewise, to stop this system from being exported to other countries. Today, we see what is happening in Venezuela, the dictatorships in Venezuela, in Nicaragua, and this is a serious problem. It’s an issue of repression and a lack of human rights.
Thanks to Cubans having greater access to the Internet, today we know that the embargo exists, but also that there is trade between Cuba and the US. I would like it if you could tell us a little bit about this please. What are the products that Cuba is buying from the US right now? What is Cuba allowed to buy? Which of the products authorized does it buy? I ask this because maybe Cuba doesn’t buy all of them. What are the conditions for this trade? Can you tell us a little bit about all of this?
Zúñiga-Brown: This is another great secret, it seems, about US-Cuba relations. The reality is there is a lot of contact between the two countries. Cuba is one of the countries with the highest demand of people [of people wanting to visit]. In that sense there are many US and Cuban-American citizens who come. I always find it funny when the statistics are given. The numbers are separated from the place the Cubans come from and almost 90% of them come from Miami. Because if you join these two numbers, a lot of US citizens come here. Clearly, there are also many Cubans who go to the US, or want to go there. Unfortunately, many want to go there forever.
In terms of the products we send Cuba, looking at last year (2019) alone, 3.7 million USD were spent on medicines and medical products. If we look at this year up until June, we are talking about just over 100 million dollars. Mainly agricultural products, and especially food and the famous chicken you see across the country. However, aside from chicken, Cuba also bought phosphates and fertilizers, some clothes, personal hygiene items, soap, cleaning products…
We would like there to be greater trade and this has continued over the years. If you go back to the early ‘90s, we’re talking about a list of things approved to be sent to Cuba worth billions of dollars. That’s to say, there is an influx of US products to Cuba, an influx of US citizens to Cuba, and it’s one of the things that keeps the country afloat.
A recurring problem people like me have, belonging to Cuba’s private sector -not self-employed like the Cuban government calls it-, is that we frequently run into situations where we are limited because we fall victim to the embargo.
For example, we can’t use PayPal to promote services abroad or to receive payments from foreign customers. Some online services and their platforms, are closed to Cuban webmasters. How could the US Government and State Department ensure that the Cuban people and private business owners don’t have these problems when marketing on or using US platforms?
Zúñiga-Brown: The US government’s policy is really trying to separate the Internet from the embargo’s greatest measures. We know that the Internet is a modern-day necessity in every country, including Cuba. Obviously, one of the differences which has given me a lot of hope, is that the Internet does exist today. It isn’t as advanced as it is in other countries, but it does exist. We have separated it from the embargo. I really hope the Cuban people are able to communicate more, and use it as a platform for their businesses.
I am a consumer of made in Cuba products, online. Products such as this program and products such as the ones I watch on YouTube, many bloggers… It’s interesting that this continues. It’s new for those of us who have just arrived and for Cubans too. It would be great if it could develop further.
Right now, the real reason the embargo exists is because of what I said previously. It’s because of what Cuba does here and outside its country. So, it’s complicated to try and hold onto these relations. However, they do exist more and more today, and I hope this continues.
Clearly, the Cuban products that are sold the most in the US, aside from fine Cuban people, are news, music, art, and this is complimented by marabu charcoal that is sold in many countries worldwide, but also in the US. What I’m getting at is that you can sell to the US, but I won’t deny it can be difficult.
Thousands and thousands of Cubans are concerned about one thing: consular services at the US Embassy. This includes family reconciliation, the US complying with the 20,000 visas the Embassy would grant, according to bilateral agreements. I know what you are going to tell me, because I spoke with Department of State officials. I have statements too, made to the press about the so-called “sonic attacks” and danger.
However, I was reading a little bit about your work and I picked up one example that caught my attention. While serving as the Consul in Monterrey, Mexico, in April 2016, a safety warning was issued. It strongly recommend US citizens take great care if they were traveling within three Mexican states.
In fact, consular employees were even given the recommendation not to travel to some cities if they weren’t traveling in a bulletproof vehicle. Likewise, they would receive extra pay for working in dangerous conditions. What I’m getting at is that you are a person with vast experience working in dangerous environments. That’s why I want to ask: do you believe there is still a risk for US Embassy personnel in Cuba? One that justifies the Embassy remaining practically closed?
Zúñiga-Brown: It’s a good point, and an important one at that. Like the embargo, we maybe have to start at the beginning of the story. The thing is that there was something that affected US personnel, so we had to reduce our staff. Now with COVID-19, we’ve had to reduce this number further. We still don’t have the conditions we need to reopen, and wishfully there is something we can do.
Regarding Monterrey: it was up to me to get my staff’s families back to Monterrey after seven years. We had evacuated because of X situation and it was highly rewarding work.
I’m getting to something that I really love. What will Cuba’s future be like? I believe it will be bright. It will be wonderful. First of all, because of the Cuban people and, secondly, because of Cuba itself, the island, its natural riches and beauty.
In terms of those who seek to emigrate, we don’t have a Consulate, quite frankly. It isn’t open, so we can’t process them. We have tried to process what we can, especially at the US Embassy in Guyana. We chose that country especially because Cubans don’t need a visa to enter. However, immigration agreements are serious and aside from our wish of wanting to grant the 20,000 visas per year, we can’t right now given the current situation. I believe that everyone can understand this.
I’m sure that many people listening to this broadcast will be listening closely to the details of immigration. We take it very seriously, we hear them, and we want to get somewhere. It is an issue we have to resolve, to put it in Cuban terms. We are fully aware that this is an extremely important matter.
Honestly, I would like us to get to the point where Cubans don’t want to emigrate like they do today. The demographic problems Cuba has right now, and in the future, are quite serious. So, I hope we can reach a democratic future, where human rights are respected. In that way, Cuba can move forward, as I’m sure it will in its own time.
In addition to the economic embargo, there have been many other sanctions that have been imposed over the years. Some were passed as laws by your Congress. However recently, a series of sanctions that I find particularly interesting, sanctions with a name and surname, were approved. The most recent case reported in the press involved General Luis Alberto Rodriguez Lopez Callejas.
I understand that these sanctions are very common and can be found across the world. The US decides to sanction organizations or individuals in different ways. These can be economic sanctions, or sanctions on accounts in US banks, properties in the US or third countries. I wonder, why the country Cuba has so many sanctions and less of these personalized sanctions. I ask because it’s common practice for the US government to impose these kinds of personalized sanctions? Do you believe this is going to change in the future? Do you believe that this is a practice that will continue in the future?
Zúñiga-Brown: What we have said is that we will continue to apply pressure because of what Cuba is doing inside the country and what it does in other countries. In terms of what is happening here and in Venezuela and other countries too. There are certain people who are responsible for policy and therefore sanctions are being applied. They are being applied in a way so that they can be seen, in public. So that they understand that they need to respect human rights in Cuba. Exporting this system involves what we are seeing today with the demise of Venezuela.
This is a problem for us, and we said this in the last person sanctioned, a named case. This tells them we are looking for the influx of resources that go to certain State members. The Cuban State has decided, themselves, to put almost all of this under the name of one company [Gaesa]. We could say that it is almost an military industrial complex, why not under the Ministry of Tourism? I don’t know, it’s up to them, we don’t understand it properly. However, given the situation, the sanction has been announced precisely because this company is a source of revenue for the State, which does what it does in Cuba and outside.
I would like to ask you one last question: when your government talks about the Cuban government, it usually talks about the Castros. Fidel Castro passed away many moons ago. Raul Castro is no longer the president, but continues to be the First Secretary of the PCC -which is the most important political position in the country-, and he has announced his retirement in 2021. How does the future of US-Cuba relations look to you? In a time when there is no longer a person with Castro for a surname in power?
Zúñiga-Brown: I’m going to give you an answer that might not be what you are looking for, but I don’t have a crystal ball, I can’t predict the future. Like the wise Mexican Mario Moreno once said: “it’s in the details.” There are always details, in Cuba, like everywhere else. And if he has made this announcement, we have to see how this translates in reality.
So, we’ll have to wait for the future to see what happens. I don’t want to take up any more of your time. I know you have a busy agenda. Thank you so much for sitting down with us and giving us this interview to start off our third season, and I wish you the best of luck with your work in our country.
Zúñiga-Brown: Best of luck to you with your season and I wish the best to every Cuban.
Well Nick, he is an employee of a recognized state employed in a diplomatic role. His function is to present and represent the political position of that state. My opinion is that he did exactly that.
MacU MacD obviously thinks that to comment sensibly and correctly upon the views of one with whom one may actually disagree, is in some strange way offering support to those policies. That criticism merely reflects ignorance.
To give you a grin as I previously revealed his prime role, I recall that a close relative of mine had CD plates upon his car in Austria. One hundred and forty seven meetings with the Russians, and they never knew that he spoke Russian. That provides extra thinking time whilst the interpreter is translating. But Austria gained her freedom – the only territory the Russians ever gave up by negotiation – but they didn’t make the same mistake in Germany. Such is diplomacy!
It is touching to record that my family has a picture by a well-known Austrian artist of part of eastern Austria. The artist inscribed it: ‘To **** **** in exchange for the Burgenland’
That from one who gained freedom from under the yoke of communism.
I understand your points Mr MacD.
But I think this situation begs a question on a slightly more existential plane:
If a ‘Diplomat’ is representing someone and something entirely undiplomatic, then is it even reasonable to call him a Diplomat??
MacU MacD is obviously unable to absorb the nuances of discussion, but admires you Nick and deplores my recording reality. So be it, reality however doesn’t change even when misinformation is cast. Regarding Miami, it is not a city I have visited, nor do I wish to do so. Oddly, only one of the several Cubans I know who have fled to the US, none live in Miami but in other parts of Florida. When making return trips to Cuba, none regret the risks they took when fleeing. The same applies to the former Cubans I have met in Canada.
I note with interest our similar views upon the US electoral system. Their are many problems emanating from the US Constitution, which appears to be locked in although evidently in need of a severe overhaul.
I continue to think that Zuniga-Brown properly reflected US policies towards Cuba. One may choose to abuse him for doing so, but that is his professional role. I think that bearing in mind those US policies, his comments were logical. But I understand that there are those who do not comprehend diplomacy or the role of diplomats.
Mr MacD,
The USA was clearly interested in Cuba during the Cold War as they were on opposing sides. They unleashed various sabotage efforts most of which were so inept that the great Homer Simpson coulda organised a better effort.
US politicians will always be interested in Cuba for as long as the ridiculous and archaic Election College Vote system, designed for a fledgling revolutionary nation 250 years ago, clings on.
The people of the USA largely and quite rightly couldn’t give a damn about Cuba. They got plenty of other grave and serious sh*t to concern themselves with.
This baleful idea that the USA carries out its slimeball anti Cuba policies because of some kinda benevolent desire to bring democracy to Cuba’s shores is absurd. It is the height of hypocrisy.
President Obama, with his long term objectives, fully recognised that old and decrepit hypocrisy for what it was (is).
His mature reasoning was entirely inconsistent with the majority of US policy toward Cuba.
Why?
1. He’s way more far sighted and shrewd than the typical sad little bozo that occupies the White House.
2. He had no further need to secure FLA Electoral College Votes.
MacU_MacD,
Just to clarify – My comment was directed toward the venerable Mr MacD.
Apologies for any confusion.
I agree with your comment about the dastardly Zuniga Brown being reflective of the trump regime.
Regarding Mr MacD: He and I disagree on much but nevertheless our disagreements do not take away from the fact that I hold him with a due degree of respect and regard.
Miami is a city that I have known for decades. It has it’s good, bad and ugly. It’s a glorious sun drenched mixture of the three. Not so dissimilar to the even more glorious Havana.
I reckon Mr MacD would perhaps be a fish out of water In Miami.
Nick, let me get to the point you are making. The person you speak of clearly is MacD.
Nick, cool down, re-read what I wrote and think rationally. You might actually conclude that my assessment of US thinking was correct. Incidentally whereas I agree that most US citizens don’t care a fig about Cuba (if they even know where it is), but disagree with your view that the US has no real interest in Cuba – history demonstrates that you are wrong!
MacU MacD
You obviously believe as I do that Zuniga-Brown is describing and reflecting US policies. That being the case, when commenting, I carefully looked at Cuban “problem” as if through US eyes. As one with prolonged political experience, I always endeavor to understand the reasoning and motivations of others. In my opinion the views expressed by Zuniga-Brown were consistent with US policy – with which I am well acquainted and have written about at length. If you care to inform yourself about those policies and the reasoning behind them, you too might conclude that he was logical.
I defy you, whoever you are when not using a rather silly temporary nom-de-plume, to find illustration of my supporting US policies towards Cuba.
You can search all the records of Havana Times for many years and/or read my book, where the chapter upon ‘The USA’ commences:
“US policies towards the Latin American countries have been a succession of political blunders of magnitude since the adioption of the Monroe Doctrine of 1823”
with regard to the Platt Amendment:
“The obvious purpose was to make the US completely dominant in Cuban-US relations.”
on the 1903 Treaty of Relations:
“the Treaty of Relations which was used to justify occupation of Cuba from 1906 – 1909”
on Helms-Burton:
“The introduction of the Helms-Burton Act of March 6, 1996 was both naive and heavy handed.”
I am a realist and have read the documents to which I refer, and continue to think that my comments were accurate in saying that the views expressed by Zuniga-Brown were in logical accord with US policies. I did not say that I favoured those policies. Why would I when my home is in Cuba and although flying over it on innumerable occasions, have never set foot in Miami, nor would I seek so to do !
Whilst writing of documents, I would advise critics of the US Embargo, to read the US Cuban Democracy Act, to enable full understanding of its declared intentions and to make informed comment. Incidentally I am on record here in these pages, as being in favour of its termination as whether well-intended or not, it obviously failed in its objectives. Have you cared to properly inform yourself?
Mr MacD,
The USA and most of its citizens have no real interest in Cuba.
US politicians only have an interest in FLA Electoral College votes which remain important in its archaic semi democratic system. And it has an interest in ensuring that nations in its backyard don’t step too far out of line.
All US policy toward Cuba revolves around this. This remains unchanged.
In order to secure FLA votes, US politicians compete with was each other on who can be the most bad*ss toward Cuba. This can include anything from myriad inept assassination attempts, trying to introduce swine flu to Cuba or harbouring murderous anti-Cuba terrorists.
I’m very clear – I regard the USA as the oppressor.
But it appears that are consistently an apologist for their bizarre array of failed oppressive policies toward Cuba.
Oh Nick, your fixations are such that you do not read clearly as you are full of pre-conceptions. You consider that because I carefully explained “viewed through US eyes”, that that represents being an apologist. So now Nick, perhaps you will explain why the US will change its views and policies?
Whether you or I agree or disagree with US policies, they are – as Cuba demonstrates and I explained, consistent. The sole break offered to Cuba, was declined, and the long standing US policies now continue.
I do not make excuses for US policies, in what I wrote, I merely recognize what they are.
Your enthusiasm to abuse is endless, not based upon fact, but upon those silly pre-conceptions.
I did not mention Russia or its multitude of atrocities, use of poisons (still being practiced), nor did I speak of or defend US practices. It is your need to froth and abuse that dominates your thinking.
Get over it!
Perhaps there are contributors here who think that the USA doesn’t need to pay heed to basic and decent moral norms?
Perhaps there are those who think that the USA and it’s inhabitants are so exceptional by nature that normal humanitarianism does not apply?
Perhaps there are those who think that the morally-defunct-trump-USA can go round doing what the f**k it pleases?
Perhaps there are those who have short memories?
Perhaps there are those who find the kicking boot to be more comfortable now it’s on the other foot?
Perhaps there are those who like to see a kicking boot so long as it ain’t them being kicked?
Perhaps there are those who see a bandwagon marked ‘exceptional’ that used to exclude them but as soon as the exclusion is somewhat but not wholly lifted they scramble aboard and clamour to sign up to membership of the deluded ranks of the exceptional?
Perhaps there are apologists for policies that cannot, on moral grounds, ever be condoned or excused.
Perhaps there’s something here that badly stinks?
Zuniga-Brown is a manipulative liar so reflective of the Trump regime. MacD should move to Miami and join other Cuban ‘patriots’ working for the imperialists.
Those Castro “lamabotas” who frequent this blog, please reread this post, especially the part where Zuniga-Brown details that food and medicine as well as other products that are exempt from the US embargo. So enough already about Cubans dying because the Castro dictatorship can’t buy medicine for their people. Its BS. The real reason Cuban pharmacy shelves are empty is because of the inept Cuban government. The embargo is not the problem.
Mr MacD,
Throughout the Cold War the USA and Russia sought total dominance over their less powerful neighbours.
This ranged from the relatively benign to the myriad sick and unspeakable acts of terror and torture, extra territorial killings, proxy war games, military interventions, coups, germ warfare. the introduction of viruses etc…..
To try and discern between the actions and atrocities of these two global rivals is a complete fool’s errand.
Mr MacD, you appear to be a willing apologist for the USA’s role in their share of these activities. A fellow traveler. Sadly, your rigid political opinions obscure any chance of rational reflection.
The Cold War is over. Yet, decades on, you are still clinging on to your position as a fellow traveler and an entirely willing apologist for the USA’ s share of Cold War era atrocities.
And bizarrely you also appear to be an apologist for post Cold War era US foreign policy. On the one hand you claim to oppose trump – yet on the other hand you are an apologist for his flaccid post-imperialist thrashing around.
At least during the Cold War there was some kind of pretext for twisted US policy – now there is none. Yet you still choose to make lame excuses on their behalf.
The best way to judge any of the many historical empires that the human race has spewed out is to look at how they react when they find themselves on their way down.
Do they go down with any degree of humility and grace?
Or do they narcissistically try and take the rest of humanity with them (and when they take this second course who are their apologists?) ???
The reasoning is consistent. the US opposes communism and specifically the Stalinist interpretation as practiced by Cuba and promoted by the Castro regime in Venezuela and elsewhere. Cuba having rejected overtures by Obama, cannot expect the US to change its policies unilaterally.
Obvious arising questions include the reasoning behind Cuba purchasing products from the US that are readily available from other countries? Who specifically is benefitting?
Clearly, the US has concerns about the manipulations of GAESA and the involvement of General Rodriguez Callejas in controlling some 80% of the Cuban economy. Does he have other “interests” that have not been disclosed?
The comment by Zuniga-Brown that he would like to see changes in Cuba that would remove the wish by Cubans to emigrate and:
“remove the demographic problems that Cuba has right now, and in the future”
is indicative of a proper analysis of the Castro regime’s policy problems.
Viewed through US interests, there is no reason for changing policies and the annual round of protestation by Cuba and the UN with the resolution for removal of the embargo, will continue to be ineffective – although enabling Bruno Rodriguez Callejas to enjoy a few good steaks.