U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

68–020 CC WASHINGTON : 2000

CHILDREN’S RIGHTS IN CUBA

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 13, 2000

Serial No. 106–163

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York, Chairman

WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois

DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey

DAN BURTON, Indiana

ELTON GALLEGLY, California

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida

CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina

DANA ROHRABACHER, California

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California

PETER T. KING, New York

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio

MARSHALL ‘‘MARK’’ SANFORD, South

Carolina

MATT SALMON, Arizona

AMO HOUGHTON, New York

TOM CAMPBELL, California

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York

KEVIN BRADY, Texas

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio

GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California

JOHN COOKSEY, Louisiana

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

SAM GEJDENSON, Connecticut

TOM LANTOS, California

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American

Samoa

MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ, California

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia

ALCEE L. HASTINGS, Florida

PAT DANNER, Missouri

EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama

BRAD SHERMAN, California

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida

STEVEN R. ROTHMAN, New Jersey

JIM DAVIS, Florida

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York

BARBARA LEE, California

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania

RICHARD J. GARON, Chief of Staff

KATHLEEN BERTELSEN MOAZED, Democratic Chief of Staff

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman

WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois

DAN BURTON, Indiana

CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina

PETER T. KING, New York

MATT SALMON, Arizona

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

CYNTHIA A. MCKINNEY, Georgia

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American

Samoa

EARL F. HILLIARD, Alabama

BRAD SHERMAN, California

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York

GROVER JOSEPH REES, Subcommittee Staff Director

DOUGLAS C. ANDERSON, Counsel

PETER HICKEY, Democratic Staff Director

NICOLLE A. SESTRIC, Staff Associate

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Page

WITNESSES

Maria Dominguez, Executive Director, St. Thomas University Human Rights

Center .................................................................................................................... 21

The Reverend Lucius Walker, Jr., Executive Director, Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization ....................................................................... 24

Jorge Garcia, relative of victims killed in the sinking of the ‘‘13 de Marzo,’’

and former schoolteacher in Cuba ...................................................................... 28

Ileana Fuentes, feminist author and participant in ‘‘Operacion Pedro Pan’’ ...... 29

Jose Cohen, father of three children still being held in Cuba ............................. 34

Neri Torres, Director of Choreography for Gloria Estefan, Survivor of Cuban

child labor camp ................................................................................................... 36

Daniel Shanfield, Staff Attorney, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights ......... 39

APPENDIX

Prepared statements:

The Honorable Christopher H. Smith, a Representative in Congress from

New Jersey, and Chairman, Subcommittee on International Operations

and Human Rights ............................................................................................... 64

The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a Representative in Congress from Florida .......................................................................................................................... 67

The Honorable Lincoln Diaz-Balart, a Representative in Congress from Florida .......................................................................................................................... 70

The Honorable Robert Menendez, a Representative in Congress from New

Jersey .................................................................................................................... 72

Maria Dominguez .................................................................................................... 74

Jorge Garcia ............................................................................................................. 78

Ileana Fuentes ......................................................................................................... 97

Jose Cohen ............................................................................................................... 104

Daniel Shanfield ...................................................................................................... 113

Additional material submitted for the record:

Translated selections from the Cuban Code of the Child, submitted by Ileana

Fuentes ................................................................................................................. 120

‘‘Elian Needs His Dad,’’ by Representative Steve Largent, submitted by Representative William D. Delahunt ........................................................................ 122

Selections from ‘‘≠ A Leer!,’’ Cuban primary school textbook, submitted by

Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen .................................................................. 124

‘‘Through a Child’s Eyes: Protecting the Most Vulnerable Asylum Seekers,’’

by Jacqueline Bhabha and Wendy A. Young, submitted by Daniel

Shanfield ............................................................................................................... 135

(1)

CHILDREN’S RIGHTS IN CUBA

THURSDAY, APRIL 13, 2000

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL

OPERATIONS AND HUMAN RIGHTS,

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS,

Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:08 p.m., in room

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith

(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding.

Mr. SMITH. The Subcommittee will come to order. Good afternoon.

The tragic plight of 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez has focused the attention of the American public on two dramatically different views

of what life might be like for children in Cuba, and in particular,

of what would happen to a child who was returned to Cuba after

managing to escape to the United States.

The picture presented by the Clinton administration and by

many in the news media, especially here in the United States,

might have been drawn by Norman Rockwell. The child is welcomed by a loving family, by his classmates and teachers, and life

soon returns to normal. The only cloud on the horizon is that the

family is poor, which in this version of events is caused by the U.S.

trade embargo rather than by the policies of the Castro regime. But

on the whole everyone is happy except a few people in Miami, who

in this view are the ones who caused the whole problem in the first

place.

In the other picture it is the child himself who is unhappy, and

he is likely to be very unhappy for the rest of his life. Upon his

return to Cuba, the child is greeted by mass demonstrations ordered by the government. There are banners announcing that ‘‘the

Cuban people have reclaimed their son’’ who was ‘‘kidnapped’’ by

the enemies of the revolution.

A government official announces that the child is a ‘‘possession’’ of the Cuban state. Arrangements are made for a public appearance with Castro himself, provided that measures can be taken to

guarantee that the child will not spoil the occasion by showing fear

or some other inappropriate emotion in the presence of the dictator.

But in this version of events the homecoming is only the beginning. For the rest of his life, the child will be in the effective custody not of his father but of the Cuban Government. His education

will consist mostly of political indoctrination, and when he is 11 he

will be taken to a work camp for weeks or months of forced labor

and even more intense indoctrination.

2

The child and his family are watched every day and hour of their

lives by government agents. If these agents see anything suspicious, any signs of independent thought or action as the child

grows older, there will be a stern warning from the security forces

and from the local government enforcers. If he should ever dare to

speak his mind, he can be arrested and imprisoned for a crime

called ‘‘dangerousness.’’ And he will never, never be allowed to

leave.

Today’s hearing is an attempt to learn which of these views is

more consistent with the facts. We will hear from experts on Cuban

law, who will describe the respective roles assigned to the family

and to the government in raising children. We will also hear the

testimony of witnesses who have firsthand experience with the

Cuban education system, the law enforcement system, the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, and other agencies of the

government and of the Communist party with which the child will

come in contact. I hope these witnesses will address not only the

way the Cuban Government treats ordinary children, but also any

special treatment it might be expected to give a child who had

come to its special attention.

Finally, we will hear testimony on the extent to which the

United States legal system should take account of the facts about

Cuba, or for that matter about any other country, in deciding

whether to return a child, whether in the context of an asylum application or any other immigration proceeding.

I want to make clear at the outset that I find the Elian Gonzalez

deeply troubling. On the one hand, in determining what is in the

best interest of the child, I firmly believe there should be a strong

presumption that the child’s best interest is to be with his natural

parents or parent.

But there are exceptions to this rule, however rare, and what

troubles me the most about this case is that there has never been

a judicial or administrative hearing to take evidence and find facts

in an attempt to consider carefully and objectively whether this

case falls within one of those rare exceptions. Instead, the Attorney

General seems to have substituted her own intuitive judgment,

based solely on an interview by an INS official in Cuba with the

father.

This informal factfinding process seems to have dramatically underestimated the extent to which the boy’s father’s actions may

have been dictated by fear of the Cuban Government, as well as

the extent to which the child’s own life will be controlled by the

government, rather than by his father, if he returns. Sending a

child, or anyone else for that matter, back to Cuba is not the same

as sending him to Mexico or France.

For example, here is what the United States State Department’s

1999 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices have to say

about arbitrary interference with privacy, the family, home, and

correspondence. This the U.S. State Department speaking:

‘‘Although the Constitution provides for the inviolability of a citizen’s home and correspondence, official surveillance of private and

family affairs by government-controlled mass organizations, such

as the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, remains one

of the most pervasive and repressive features of Cuban life. The

3

State has assumed the right to interfere in the lives of citizens,

even those who do not actively oppose the Government and its

practices. The mass organizations’ ostensible purpose is to ‘improve

the citizenry,’ but in fact their goal is to discover and to discourage

nonconformity. Education is grounded in Marxist ideology. State

organizations and schools are charged with the ‘integral formation

of children and youth.’ ’’

The report goes on to say, and again this is the U.S. Department

of State speaking, ‘‘The authorities utilize a wide range of social

controls. The Interior Ministry employs an intricate system of informants and block committees, the CDRs, to monitor and control

public opinion. While less capable than in the past, CDRs continue

to report on suspicious activity, including conspicuous consumption;

unauthorized meetings, including those with foreigners; and defiant attitudes toward the Government and the revolution.’’

State control over the lives of children in Cuba is perhaps even

more pervasive than over the lives of other citizens. For example,

Article 5 of the Children and Youth Code of the Republic of Cuba

requires all persons who come in contact with children and youth

‘‘to be an example to the formation of the communist personality.’’

Article 11 requires that teachers show, ‘‘a high mission’’—the highest mission—‘‘to the development of a communist personality in

children.’’ Article 23 limits eligibility for higher education to children who demonstrate ‘‘proper political attitude and social conduct.’’ And there are many more.

Maybe I am wrong about what all this means for the future of

Elian Gonzalez. Maybe an impartial hearing would determine that

Elian’s father is acting out of his own free will, and that the Cuban

Government will leave him in peace to raise his son. But we will

never know until we have such a hearing.

The proceedings that are currently going on in Federal court do

not address the merits of these questions. Instead, they are limited

to a narrow procedural question, and that is whether it was in the

Attorney General’s discretion to deny a hearing by letting Elian’s

father withdraw his asylum claim.

The government is arguing that the Attorney General’s discretion

is so broad that she can either grant or deny a hearing, either keep

Elian here or send him back, whichever she chooses. This may be

correct. The lower court agreed that her discretion under the immigration laws is so broad that she can send Elian back to Cuba

without due process. But even if it is correct, it is absolutely not

right.

I look forward to hearing our very distinguished witnesses, and

at this point I would like to yield to my colleague, Cynthia McKinney, the Ranking Democrat.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We are here today because, as Members of the House International Relations Committee, International Operations and

Human Rights Subcommittee, we realize the profound importance

the Elian Gonzalez case has had on all of us. You could say the

whole world is watching us right now. Issues regarding the rule of

law, immigration, and foreign policy have risen to the forefront,

fueling heated debate from all sides of the political spectrum.

4

Today our discussion focuses on the rights of the child in Cuba.

There is no doubt that in the course of this hearing you will hear

horror stories about the problems within Cuban society. But, as in

any society, a list of problems doesn’t paint the entire picture.

Right now, any unarmed black man in America ought to be afraid

to go to New York City. I know I am afraid to let my son go there

because he might come back to me in a body bag. But does that

paint the entire picture of black life in America?

We can’t deny that there are human rights violations within

Cuba, and we cannot deny that people lack certain freedoms in

Cuba that we enjoy in our own country. The question is, what is

life really like in Cuba, and how do we measure the quality of life

in a nation?

First, let me just state for the record, I believe in America. I believe in the America that puts the health and welfare of children

first, the America that believes in the sanctity of family, the America that believes in the bond between a father and his child. But,

like many other Americans, I am forced to confront the stark contrasts between our rhetoric and our policies.

Here in Washington, DC, and in other cities across America,

Latino children struggle to survive. They struggle against prejudice

and discrimination. They struggle to stay out of prison. They struggle to enjoy what white American children take for granted: neighborhood schools full of equipment, happy teachers and high expectations; thriving neighborhoods with sidewalks and street lights;

open spaces in parks; neighborhood sports programs paid for by

their volunteer parents; college.

Instead, most Latino children in this country have a much different experience, where their ability to speak the Spanish language outside of their home is assaulted by policymakers, and their

ability to learn English is defunded by those same politicians. And

if they happen to live in the vicinity of Viejecas, then they could

even get bombed dead by live fire from the U.S. military.

American children have easy access to video games whose objectives are to score as many kills as possible, and unfortunately our

children bring those video games to life, and too often die at the

hands of other children who take deadly aim at their schoolmates

and neighbors with handguns and other weapons. In our own country, children simply have too much access to guns. They bring them

into the schools, and unfortunately we know the rest.

Yesterday President Clinton highlighted again the need for

America to tighten its gun laws and to close the gun show loophole.

We can’t get that through Congress. In the meantime, however,

every day our children walk into school concerned about their personal security. This simply doesn’t happen in Cuba. Children don’t

have access to guns.

Cuba is no paradise, but neither is Cuba a place where the

health and welfare of children is ignored. Just as we use health,

education, and family life statistics to assess life in America, we too

can use them to help us tell about life in Cuba.

Cuba is one of the privileged nations of the world that has virtually 100 percent literacy. By every standard and in every reference work, literacy in Cuba is as high as it is in the United

States. In Cuba, university is fully funded by the government, and

5

students don’t face obstacles based on race or socioeconomic status,

unlike in the United States, where affirmative action programs

that embrace opportunity for America’s minorities are being wiped

out by political decisionmakers. Unfortunately, in the United

States today Latino children are still far less likely to go to college

than their white counterparts.

A recent report by UNESCO concluded that the public education

system in Cuba is the best in Latin America. In the case of Elian,

straight from Cuba’s educational system, he was so advanced for

a 6-year-old that his Miami school promoted him to the first grade.

Despite the debilitating effects of the U.S. embargo, Cuba has

tightened its belt in other areas to ensure that Cuban children receive a quality education.

In our own country we have over 40 million Americans uninsured and millions more who are underinsured. We have a health

care system in this country that provides excellent care for the

rich, but too many Americans have health care options that are

limited.

In Cuba, however, there is free and universal health care for all

citizens. There is no need for an insurance card or lengthy phone

calls over whether your HMO will pay for a certain procedure. Instead, Cuba has to deal with the thorny issue of health care tourists who go to Cuba to get medical attention that they can’t get in

their own country.

The Cuban Government takes full responsibility for the health of

its people. The population receives free preventive and rehabilitative services which range from primary care, routine medical attention and dentistry, to hospital care requiring the use of highly sophisticated medical technology. In addition, all necessary diagnostic

testing and drugs are provided free of charge to pregnant women.

Perhaps this is why Cuba has a lower infant mortality than we

have right here in Washington, D.C.

Because of the family doctor program, every Cuban neighborhood

has a physician and a clinic. There are almost 3 doctors for every

500 Cuban citizens. In the United States, our rate is just over 1

doctor for every 500 U.S. citizens, and we know the areas that are

likely to go underserved. The preponderance of those doctors are in

the swanky suburbs, not in our central cities or in our rural areas.

Now, because the Cuban Government prioritizes education and

health care for its citizens, it has produced for them solid, recognizable results. However, the Cuban health care system does experience a lack of medicine, medicine that is desperately needed to ensure the health of Cuban children, medicine that United States policy restricts from reaching the Cuban shores.

Pay attention to the policy. We are currently sending medicine

to Vietnam, China, North Korea, and Iraq. Vietnam is a Communist country with a government that we went to war against.

China is a Communist country with a deplorable human rights

record, and now with stolen military secrets that threaten our national security. North Korea is a Communist country that will get

two nuclear reactors from us. And Iraq, our former ally, is now an

enemy that we are in a state of war against. They all receive medicine from the United States.

6

If we are truly concerned about the status of children in Cuba,

the first thing we should do is allow medicine into the country. We

should today devote ourselves to making the lives of all Cuban children better. Representatives Jose Serrano and Charlie Rangel have

introduced bills that will allow food, medicine and supplies from

the United States to enter Cuba. We should support them.

The second thing we should do is lift the embargo. The economic

embargo of Cuba has not produced the desired result. Now, it

might serve as a salve on the consciences of those who have problems with the current government, but it certainly hasn’t produced

the results that they or we want. In addition, the embargo has

been condemned by Pope John Paul II as oppressive economic

measures that are unjust and ethically unacceptable. Congressman

Ron Paul, a Republican, has introduced a bill to lift the embargo,

and we should support it.

Mr. Chairman, to merely denounce the human rights record of

Cuba in order to justify the hard line approach of United States

policy is insufficient. If we are serious about making a positive impact on human rights in Cuba, we need to reexamine our policies.

And, by the way, if the law is changed to allow Elian to stay in

the United States, then all of the children from Chiapas, Mexico,

Kosovo, Yugoslavia, Beijing, China, and Iraq, need to be included

in that law. And certainly you wouldn’t leave out the Rwandan orphans who lost their parents in the genocide that Madeleine

Albright and President Clinton wouldn’t stop.

And let’s make sure that we go and find that 16-year-old Chinese

girl who was shackled and crying as she was sent back to China.

Let’s go get the 408 Haitians and Dominicans who entered the

United States on New Year’s Day and were promptly sent back.

Let’s to out and get the children of the indigenous people who are

negatively impacted by our insatiable thirst for oil, uranium and

diamonds. But let’s go further back and find all the children who

tried to enter our country during the days of Latin America’s U.S.-

supported despots.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I am concerned about the rule of law. Do

some people in this country think they are above the law? Doris

Meissner, Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization

Service, stated in a press statement on January 5th that this decision has been based on the facts and the law. Attorney General

Janet Reno has shown tremendous restraint, grace and courage in

the face of mob intransigence. Today is April 13th, and still the

child is not with his father.

Let me conclude this way. As a mother, I grieve for Elian’s mother, who gave her own life to try and bring Elian to America. And

had she lived, this would be a different story, but she did not. And

now we are left with a child, a little boy, separated from his father

by a series of tragic events.

We must not lose sight of the facts, however. Elian’s father also

had custody of Elian in Cuba. Elian’s mother took Elian away from

his father and illegally left Cuba’s shores for America. Elian belongs with his loving father, who wants him.

Think what will happen if we don’t return the boy to his father.

How many American children have been snatched by one parent

and are now in foreign countries? Don’t we fight to get our own

7

children back? Don’t all parents have rights recognized by international law? And the last time I checked, fathers are parents, too.

False principle destroys all credibility and wisdom, and at the

end of the day, the arguments that favor keeping Elian here in

America, away from his father, are all built on an incredibly transparent false principle that destroys all credibility and wisdom in

their position.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. McKinney.

Just let me clarify the order in which we will proceed. Committee

rules stipulate that Members who are here at the gavel, in order

of seniority, will make their opening statements, followed by other

Members who were here at the gavel, and then Committee Members who came in later at the time of their arrival. So I would like

to recognize at this point the gentleman from American Samoa, Eni

Faleomavaega.

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to

certainly commend you for your leadership in being a champion of

human rights, as a Member of this Committee and over the years,

the privilege I have had in working with you, and your fortitude

and courage in trying to bring out to light some of these issues that

are very important not only to our American community but

throughout the world.

I would like to first also express my association with some of the

comments that were made earlier by the gentlelady from Georgia,

very keen observation of some of the contradictions and the problems that we put the finger on other countries of the world and

their problems. Sometimes we tend to forget that we have our own

problems, and tend to kind of push it aside, not making it as a

matter of reality to confront these problems courageously and to

find solutions to them.

Mr. Chairman, the issue that is before us, I don’t need to say

how much the media has played this, not only in the sense of our

national norm, where every American parent, every American all

over the country has seen through and between and below and

above, and everything that we have seen about this child named

Elian Gonzalez. Elian Gonzalez to me is not a Cuban, he is a child,

and I am sure that every parent here in America would have a

sense of compassion and understanding of what this child is going

through.

And sincerely, Mr. Chairman, I hope we don’t politicize this hearing to the extent of making it an emotional issue, but to the extent

that hopefully, if the witnesses that are before us are going to shed

more light and understanding and appreciation of what is happening, not only with Fidel Castro’s administration and his own

ruling there in Cuba, but also for us to understand more forcefully

what we have to do. And I can say at this point in time that I don’t

envy what our Attorney General has had to go through in trying

to make those decisions, not necessarily popular, not necessarily

right, if there is a rightness in this issue.

We can all claim laurels and beliefs, and everything that we believe, what this Nation is all about. But the bottom line here is

that we talk about human rights of everybody else, but we never

8

have a sense of appreciation if there are human rights also for children.

And I sincerely hope, Mr. Chairman, that when we hear from our

witnesses, and the dialogue and the questions, I do have several

questions of my own that I want to proceed with this hearing, but

I hope that our hearing will be one of construction and not of divisiveness, and hopefully that it will provide a better bearing, not

only for Elian’s sake, but certainly as a Nation we need to reflect

deeply about the serious social and political implication of what

this case has brought to the Nation by the media.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Faleomavaega. Just let

me say, before yielding to Mr. Diaz-Balart, that it is worth noting

at this juncture that if we were to conduct such an exercise as this

in Cuba, unless we agreed with the government, we would be

thrown in jail, or at least arrested or interrogated. The Country Reports on Human Rights Practices make it very clear that the estimation is that there are between 350 to 400 political prisoners in

human jails.

I yield to Lincoln Diaz-Balart.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank the

Committee for its courtesy in permitting me, as a Member of the

Rules Committee, to be here today and express my thoughts.

I think that in the just 41⁄2 months since the Elian Gonzalez matter has brought to international attention the issue of Cuba, it is

important to point out the abuses against children in Cuba that

highlight the lack of parental and children’s rights under the totalitarian state there.

I have some examples that I would like to mention, just a few

that have come to my attention due to the courageous, very courageous work of independent journalists on the island who have managed to send out to the international community despite a law that

Castro’s public parliament passed just a few months ago threatening up to 30 years imprisonment for ‘‘crimes’’ such as reporting

on human rights abuses.

On January 14th of this year, the independent journalist Victor

Rolando Arroyo was sentenced to 6 months in prison for purchasing

toys to give to needy children in Cuba to commemorate Three

Kings Day, which is in the Hispanic world the day in which Christmas is commemorated for children. During his trial, Mr. Arroyo

stated, ‘‘I think public opinion,’’ international public opinion, ‘‘needs

to meditate on what has occurred and evaluate that in Cuba you

are not allowed to give toys to needy children. The government mobilizes thousands to claim a child, while thousands are denied a

simple toy which might bring them a smile.’’

January 22nd of this year, in the town of Betancourt in

Matanzas, the family of Miguel Sigler Amaya, an activist of the

Movimiento Opcion Alterantiva, was brutally beaten by the branch

of Castro’s state security forces known as Brigades of Fast Response. The four children of Mr. Sigler Amaya, who range in ages

between 2 and 14, after the brutal beatings, were arrested along

with their mother, who was also arrested in a semi-conscious state

due to the attack by Castro’s agents.

9

January 24th of this year in Lat Tunas, a 9-year-old girl, Alva

Riveron Fuentes, was expelled from school for not participating in

the activities of the Young of Young Communist Pioneers.

The 14-year-old daughter of the dissident Leida Miranda, on January 25th in Cienfuegos, was reported missing to police. The police

informed Ms. Miranda, the dissident, that they ‘‘did not have gasoline in their vehicles to search for her daughter.’’ Ms. Miranda further denounced he Cuba Press that the police had expressly refused to post missing posters of her daughter.

March 13th in Caibarien, Villa Clara, Duniesky Rodriguez, age

17, was beaten by the police of Santi Espiritu because of his friendship with members of the dissident movement. A Cuban state security agent named Jorge Luis, last name unknown, told the 17-yearold that he has 30 days to leave Caibarien.

March 14th of this year, it was reported from Havana by Hector

Maseda that 10th and 11th graders from the vocational school

Lenin were being obligated to participate in daily demonstrations.

The students are taken daily to political activities after completing

their class days. One student stated, ‘‘We are exhausted due to

these countless demonstrations and the lack of proper nutrition in

our school. We are awakened at 6. Many times we don’t get to our

room until 1 in the morning due to these forced demonstrations.’’ April 3rd in Las Tunas, dissident Aida Perez, the grandmother

of 12-year-old Isidro Quinones Perez, who has been missing for 4

months, denounced that the National Police refuse to search for her

grandson. Matter of fact, they told her, ‘‘Look for him, and when

you find him, turn him over so we can place him in a correctional

school.’’ April 4th this year, this month, in Camaguey, Jorge Ribes was

sentenced to 7 months in prison for not permitting his 4th grade

son to participate in the Union of Young Communist Pioneers or

participate in political activities during school hours. The school

principal, her name is Maritza Varon, denounced Mr. Ribes to the

police. He was charged with ‘‘an act against the normal development of a child.’’

April 5th, this month, 76 elementary school children in the

school Arquimedes Colina were denied a weekend pass to see their

parents because they had refused to see the television programs,

which are daily now, called ‘‘tribuna abierta,’’ where Castro discusses the Elian affair.

April 10th, reported from Havana—that is just 3 days ago—that

all the middle schools in the city have required the children to answer a question at the end of their math exams: What is your opinion on the Elian Gonzalez case? The children are graded on their

responses. A parent interviewed by Cuba-Verdad press stated, ‘‘At

first I did not understand. I thought I was not listening correctly,

then I thought my child had confused the subject area, and later

I was totally shocked to find out that this is true.’’ Another parent

stated, ‘‘My child asked me, what did mathematics have to do with

Elian?’’ I did not know the answer. I was completely dumbfounded.

Day before yesterday, El Nuevo Herald of Miami reported that

Hans Dominguez, who is 15, not only was harassed but threatened

with expulsion because his father is a member of the ‘‘30 de

Noviembre Frank Pais’’ opposition party.

10

It is going on now. It is not theory, Mr. Chairman.

I am always curious as to how it is that it seems that for some

people it is not all right for black dictators in Nigeria, for example,

like Abacha, to oppress people, or Sereras in Haiti. I know that I

certainly was in the front row of all our efforts to oppose those dictatorships. And yet it is all right for white dictator, son of a Spanish soldier who went to Cuba to fight the insurrection, the Cuban

insurrection, a white dictator, it is all right for him to oppress a

people, a majority of which are black and mulatto.

The leaders of the Cuban opposition today, people like Vladimiro

Roca and Felix Bonne and Jorge Luis Garcia Perez Antunez, are

black men and women, and they are going to be elected in the future as leaders of Cuba when there is a democratic Cuba. And the

reality of the matter is, postponing the inevitable is not only abhorrent but it is, as I have said, making excuses for a Spaniard white

dictator to oppress a people that is majority mixed race.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Diaz-Balart.

The Chair recognizes Mr. Payne.

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. I was going to just pass, because of the deference to the witnesses, but I do want to clarify the

issue of black dictators, Abacha, I think he was trying to say. But

we have, it was myself and the Members of the Congressional

Black Caucus that said we should have sanctions on Nigeria, that

we should press all kinds of ways to have human rights in Nigeria.

And so I don’t know where race has anything to do with the

rights of children. I am a new grandfather of triplets. They are 19,

20 months old. I raised my own children, now I have triplets real

close to me. And so I thought this was dealing with the rights of

children, and children in Cuba.

And I think that we are already seeing people talking about, as

Ms. Cynthia McKinney mentioned, the fact that there are certainly

inequities in the U.S. Government system. Of course, the law was

passed and people have taken advantage of the law, but in this

country we have found that African Americans who have been here

since 1492 are still trying to get laws, trying to get Confederate

flags taken down, trying to get equal opportunity.

And so I think that this whole question is becoming broader and

it is starting to take a face that I think is not healthy for the residents of Florida, in particular in Miami. I have heard statements

recently that I have never heard before. We are a country of laws,

and when you don’t like the law, you don’t defy the law. You don’t

take the law into your own hands. You don’t say that you are not

going to comply. You don’t have elected officials say we are going

to restrain our police officers from doing their job.

I have been pretty silent on this case, but I see that it is taking

some different—it is moving in other directions, and I think that

it is unhealthy, and I think that it is stimulating some of us who

have sat back to become very involved and very forceful and very

vocal in this whole matter. So I will yield back the balance of my

time.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Payne.

The Chair recognizes Ileana Ros-Lehtinen.

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much. I would like to thank

the Chairman of this Subcommittee, my friend and dear colleague,

11

Congressman Chris Smith, for his commitment to human rights

throughout the world and for his ongoing leadership and for the cooperation in holding this very important hearing today.

When Patrick Henry said, ‘‘Give me liberty or give me death,’’ little did he know that he would inspire future generations of Cuban

freedom seekers who risk life and limb to fight and to escape Castro’s gulag. Little did he know that his words would resonate loudly

in the heart and mind of Elizabeth Brotons, Elian Gonzalez’s mother. Her voice is never listened to very much, but she drowned praying for her little boy to survive and reach our great country, the

land of liberty, the United States, that has given refuge to Mr.

Diaz-Balart and to myself.

Stop a moment and think how horrific must living conditions be

under oppressive totalitarian dictatorship, how fearful must Elizabeth Brotons have been for her little boy’s future, that she would

take such desperate measures. Only those who have personally experienced communism, who have had liberty taken away from

them, could fully understand how heinous the Castro regime is to

its people and especially to its children.

The case of Elian Gonzalez has received much media attention,

but despite our best efforts to counter the Castro propaganda machine, the truth about conditions for children in Cuba, the facts

about a communist dictatorship’s sense of family and its treatment

of children, the reality which awaits Elian if he is deported to

Cuba, these facts have yet to receive the attention they merit.

First, let us address the fallacy that Elian would be returned to

his father. Castro officials themselves last week stated clearly and

publicly that Elian is indeed the property of the Cuban state. This

country went to war to eradicate such abhorred treatment of persons, as if they were subhuman or treated as property, yet we

should tolerate such conditions and such treatment for Elian Gonzalez? No, not for Elian, and not for any child.

This disregard for the value of children as human beings, and for

the essence of the family, is pervasive throughout the so-called

laws which guide the Cuban communist regime. Custody, according

to the Cuban Code of the Family, Codigo de la Ninez y de la

Juventud, can be denied to parents if they engage in behavior

which runs contrary to communist teachings. It is not me saying

it, it is not Lincoln saying it. They publish it. They are proud of

it.

This is further illustrated in Articles 5 and 8 of the Code of the

Child, which underscores that the society and the state work for

the efficient protection of youth against all influence contrary to

their communist formation. And it further states that the society

and the state watch to ascertain that all persons who come in contact with the child constitute an example for the development of his

communist personality. Those are quotes.

To ascertain whether these dictums are acted upon, all that one

needs to do is ask hundreds of children, children who have been

left orphaned by the regime as their parents, Cuban rights activists

and dissidents and political prisoners, languish in squalid jail cells,

isolated from their sons and daughters.

This is the case of Noemi, the 9-year-old daughter of Milagros

Cruz-Cano, who was deprived of her mother because Cuban State

12

Security continued to arrest Milagros for her ‘‘antisocial’’ and ‘‘dangerous’’ behavior. Those are Castro’s charges for those who call for

human rights, for civil liberties, for democracy. That is a crime in

Castro’s Cuba.

Milagros was forced into exile by the Castro regime, forced to

board a plane last October. Castro’s thugs, however, refused to let

her take her daughter, who is now essentially a hostage of the regime. All photographs and letters from her mother are seized. Her

every move is monitored. She is followed by State Security. Noemi

is chastised and subjected to psychological torture because of her

mother’s political views.

This is not fiction. This is not a made-for-TV movie. This is reality, right now. I have had the honor of spending a lot of time with

Milagros, who is on a hunger strike in Little Havana. I have seen

her sorrow and her anguish. I have heard her frustration in her

voice, and her astonishment at the willingness of so many to believe and promote Castro’s facade about family and the need to reunite Elian with his father.

I have seen and heard this same anguish in Jose Cohen, one of

the witnesses who will be testifying today, who has been struggling

for over 4 years for the Castro regime to release his three children.

However, the pain that Jose and Milagros feel cannot compare

to the unbearable loss experienced by mothers, by fathers, by

grandparents of the children who were murdered by the Castro regime on July 13, 1994, just a few years ago. These infants, toddlers

and teenagers joined their families in the tugboat that was named

‘‘13th of March’’ for a voyage that would, they say they hoped, they

prayed, bring them to the land of liberty, the United States.

However, the Cuban Coast Guard quickly turned water cannons

on them, and when that did not succeed in drowning them all, they

proceeded to ram the Coast Guard vessels into their tiny tugboat

until it was destroyed. Yes, they heard the cries of the children

calling out for their parents as they gasped for air. Yes, they saw

their frail little hands reaching out from beyond the waves. Yes,

they felt the presence of death as their tiny bodies floated into the

abyss. But Castro’s thugs did not care.

Another one of today’s witnesses, Jorge Andres Garcia, knows

firsthand about this terrible crime, this gruesome example of the

Castro dictatorship’s abuse against Cuban children. He will describe the attack which resulted in the death of 14 out of 17 of his

relatives, including his little grandson. He will elaborate upon the

tactics used by the regime to manipulate him into endorsing the official version of events.

Mr. Garcia will explain how the very same Remirez Estenoz

whom we now see at the side of Juan Miguel Gonzalez, Elian’s father is the one who was tasked to defend the attack on the ‘‘13th

of March’’ tugboat. The Castro regime had violated the most fundamental right endowed to man by the Creator, the right to life. Yet

it would denounce the children and their parents in order to justify

its actions.

When looking at children’s rights in Cuba, and also Codigo de la

Familia, another one of their proud statements about the rights of

children, we must look at the indoctrination, the psychological and

physical torture, the destruction of the child’s psyche and the sense

13

of right and wrong. We must pause and look at the evidence, such

as the one displayed in that photograph of that poster, mandatory

physical education in Castro’s Cuba, a photograph taken just a few

months ago.

Children who are 5, 6, 7 years old, holding rifles above their

heads as part of their mandated physical education class. However,

these are not mere exercises. This photograph illustrates the requirements that are clearly outlined in their very proud articles of

the Cuban Code of the Child, which states, ‘‘Children and youth

must prepare themselves for the defense of the country through

military education, acquisition of military knowledge and training.’’ So this is everyday, and the state reinforces this requirement

through books such as this one. And this is an actual photocopy of

a book, a normal, regular text that is used in Castro’s Cuba, where

they are given letters, and how will they learn the letters? ‘‘F’’ for ‘‘fusil,’’ a rifle. And how do they learn the ‘‘G’’ word? Well, they

learn the ‘‘G’’ word, the ‘‘gu’’ by guerrilla, and they have a picture

here of a guerrilla. And Che, right here, pictured front and center,

the heroes of the revolution. And how will they learn how groups

are formed? Well, here they have a proud militia, because that is

the ‘‘M’’ word, ‘‘M’’ for militia.

And that is how they learn education in Cuba. Could anyone

argue that this is an example of a healthy environment for children, to be subjected to this type of indoctrination since the age of

4? Is this the kind of rights that children enjoy in Cuba?

And this is the issue also of child slave labor. Article 44 of the

Cuban Code of the Child underscores how ‘‘the combination of

study and work is one of the fundamentals on which revolutionary

education is based.’’ ‘‘This principle,’’ it states, ‘‘is applied from infancy through simple labor activities; in primary education through

farming, and pioneer activities in the modes of production; in middle education, through farm labor camps.’’ Indoctrination, torture, forced labor, combat training, murder,

these are but just a few, a microcosm really of the gross violations

of children’s rights committed by the Castro regime, not in the

past, right now, the very same communist totalitarian dictatorship

which calls for Elian’s return to Cuba.

Do not be fooled. Open your eyes, open your hearts. Let them

guide you to the truth about children’s rights in Cuba, to the grim

reality of Castro’s tyranny, right now. Right now, under our watch.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen, thank you very much.

The Chair recognizes Mr. Sherman.

Mr. SHERMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Cuban Government is oppressive to adults and to children.

That will be well documented by these hearings, as has already

been documented before this Subcommittee in many other hearings

that you have had, that we have had on human rights in Cuba and

other countries.

But Cuba is not the only oppressive government. Sudan, Iraq,

Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea, the list goes on. We need a rule

of law to determine how we will deal with distasteful situations

that arise when there are politically charges incidents involving opVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
14

pressive regimes; a rule of law, established principles that are applied to all similar cases, regardless of politics.

Now, in Cuba they don’t need the rule of law, or at least their

government doesn’t follow it. There, if a political advantage, a need

of the dictator arises, that is what decides the case, rather than the

application of principles. But we in America, we need to follow the

rule of law, and we need to establish rules that we are willing to

see followed in case after case.

And this is not the only case where a child is here in America

and that child’s parents are planning to take the child back to an

oppressive regime. In fact, that is an occurrence that happens hundreds or thousands of times every year, and we need to adopt a

rule of law that applies in all similar circumstances. Only in Cuba

would they dispense, or only in an oppressive government would

they dispense with applicable principles and do whatever seems

called for in a case where a child is at the center of a political controversy, or where a little boy has become internationally famous.

Now, what should our rule of law be? Our rule of law has been,

I think in all circumstances, that a parent, or both parents speaking together, speaking freely and, unless there is proof that that

parent or those parents are abusive, that that parent decides where

a child will live and decides many other things about the child, as

well.

What has been suggested, as a result of Elian Gonzalez’s difficult

plight, is that we adopt a new rule, a rule that says that where

there is a competition for custody between a loving and freedomloving American family on the one hand, and a parent or two parents on the other, parents that want to take the child back to an

oppressive regime, that we should favor not the parent but the loving and freedom-loving American family. But what would this

mean?

This would mean that when the U.N. Ambassador from Afghanistan or Sudan or North Korea plans to go home, that we stop them

at the airport and take their children away, and put those children

with any freedom-loving American couple that wishes to adopt

them. Yes, Elian’s tragedy grips at our hearts, and the death of

Elian’s mother touches us all, but does Elian need freedom any less

than the children of the North Korean ambassador to the United

Nations, or the Sudanese Ambassador to the United Nations?

Those children will be flying out of this country in a year or two

or three, leaving our jurisdiction and going to oppressive regimes.

In each case we must look at two values, the values of the parents’ duty and obligation and rights to raise their children, versus

our natural desire to see all children raised in freedom. And if we

decide that freedom trumps parenthood, that politics exceeds the

connection between a father and a child, then we had better be prepared to apply that when a little baby girl or boy is born in the

home of the Ambassador or a traveler from any oppressive regime.

And I don’t think we are ready to do that, Mr. Chairman.

So we must follow the rule of law, and it is a difficult and a

harsh rule, but for a variety of reasons, children and adults leave

our country every day, sometimes voluntarily, sometimes deported.

Sometimes the children wish to leave; sometimes the children do

not. Sometimes the children are infants and have no opinion on the

15

matter at all. And we must be prepared to apply the same standards.

In this case for a while we wondered whether Elian’s father was

speaking freely, and those who are opponents and the most vocal

opponents of the Cuban regime said, ‘‘Let him bring his new wife

and his baby child here to the United States, so we know that he

is speaking freely.’’ That condition has been met, and we ought to

prove to the world that even in the most politically charged circumstance, we follow the rule of law and not the rule of politics.

At the same time, we ought to be doing everything possible to end

the circumstance where millions of people live under an oppressive

regime just 90 miles south of our own State of Florida.

And that concludes my remarks.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Sherman.

Mr. Delahunt.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I have another engagement, so I am going to have to excuse myself. In fact, I had doubts as to whether I would even be able to

attend this particular hearing, and I had some reservations as to

whether I wanted to make any statement whatsoever. I think Ms.

McKinney’s remarks, and Mr. Sherman’s, reflect my own sentiments.

But I was particularly disturbed listening today to an account

that a videotape had been made of young Elian for dissemination

over the public airways, indicating that he made a statement, before seeing his father, that he did not want to return to Cuba. I

think that motivated me to come here today. I think it was a disservice to that young child.

I am not going to make a statement, but what I am going to do

is to read an opinion piece authored by a gentleman here in the

U.S. House of Representatives who commands great respect on

both sides of the aisle, and his name is Steve Largent, a Republican from Oklahoma. This is dated April 5, 2000, and it was published in the New York Times. I am going to take the time to read

it as opposed to submit it into the record, and I am quoting. These

are his words. These are not my words, let me be clear.

Politics is keeping Elian Gonzalez from his father, and it is time that he is returned. It has already been too long. The tortuous 4-month-old custody battle over

the boy rescued at sea last November continues to play out in the courts and in

Washington, and now the political brawl has taken an ugly turn.

Elian’s relatives in Miami, who have temporary custody of him and are seeking

to block his return to Cuba, stooped to criticizing the boy’s father, Juan Miguel Gonzalez, attempting to whip up public sentiment for their cause. The relatives have

suggested that the father is somehow unfit to care for his son. How do they know?

Why are they only now raising this question? And what gives them or the court the

right to decide such a thing? Do we really want the government sitting in judgment

of every father when there is no apparent cause of action? How would the United

States react if its role and Cuba’s were reversed?

After leveling these charges against Elian’s father earlier this week, a lawyer representing the boy’s American relatives acknowledged on television they had no

proof. ‘‘We are sure he loves his own son,’’ admitted the lawyer, Linda OsbergBraun, ‘‘and we know Elian loves his father.’’

Making political hay over a 6-year-old’s tragedy of losing a mother may only compound his misery, experts say. Ken Dachman, a child psychologist in Chicago, said

he worried that Elian’s Miami relatives are shaping this child ‘‘so that I don’t think

that he will ever be able to recover fully.’’ Mr. Dachman, who is familiar with the

case, warned that the little boy would be shadowed for a long time by feelings of

distress. Elizabeth Loftus, a psychology professor at the University of Washington

16

and a leading expert on memory in children, said any child as young as Elian would

be particularly susceptible to suggestions that could alter his memory of his father. Sadly, Elian’s well-being seems to have little effect on the poisonous political rhet- oric coming from Miami and Washington. Some conservatives see this case as a

long-sought opportunity to stick a finger in the eye of Fidel Castro. Let me say unequivocally that I am second to none in my dislike for Mr. Castro’s totalitarian regime, but let’s be reasonable. Elian is a little boy who has lost his mother and desperately needs his father. This is a family issue, first and foremost.

To forget that and allow our hatred for the Cuban regime to keep us from doing

what is best for the child is shameful. It is already a tragedy that the child lost

his mother. It would be a travesty for our government to come between him and

his father.

I came to Washington with the deep-seated belief that the family is sovereign.

You can’t be for family values and at the same time advocate that governments be allowed to come between a father and a child. What a tragic mistake it would be

for society to allow the State or Federal Government to determine what is best for

our children. But that is exactly what is happening in this tug of war over Elian

Gonzalez.

As a father of four, including three sons, I know how important daddies are to 6-year-old boys. The question then becomes, is it better for Elian to live in our great

country without his father, or to live with his father in Cuba. No contest. I say reunite Elian with his daddy today.

Elian’s father and five other Cubans now have their visas for travel to the United

States. ‘‘I’m willing to leave tomorrow,’’ his father said in a prepared statement,

‘‘and I do not want to talk to any kidnapper nor accept any condition or take part

in any show or publicity over the handover of Elian.’’ So what are we waiting for?

That concludes the opinion piece by Representative Steve

Largent from Oklahoma. I yield back.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Delahunt.

Mr. Menendez.

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a Member of the

full Committee, I appreciate the opportunity to be with you and the

Ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee today.

You call this hearing at a time in which I believe that certain

communities and the Nation’s raw nerves are exposed. They are exposed because of a variety of views and a variety of issues. Elian

is only the focus of the moment, but those issues far surpass Elian.

I do regret the language that is being used by some of my colleagues, and I think that in the days ahead they will regret the

language that is being used. I have tried throughout this whole

process to be balanced and restrained in terms of the language I

have used, because I know of some of the pain of different communities in this country that I have shared with and stood by on each

and every occasion that I have been called upon to do so.

But I think it is abhorrent to speak of a community in such a

way as we have heard the Cuban American community spoken of

in this country. When I hear the words ‘‘mob intransigence,’’ when

I hear ‘‘wackos,’’ when I hear this type of terminology, it begins a

slippery slope in which we will paint other communities who feel

very passionately about their issues, to be characterized in the

same way.

I am an admirer of Mahatma Gandhi, and I am an admirer of

Dr. King. And their civil disobedience efforts, which I am sure were

characterized in words just as punishing at the time, are now used

today against a community who has shown nothing to date but restraint, has shown nothing today except for abiding by the rule of

law, and has shown nothing but the possibility of engaging in the

very same acts that Americans of every stripe and color in this

country engage in when they believe that fundamentally the law is

17

wrong. The civil disobedience that takes place in the streets of a

city when people believe that a law or the enforcement of the law

is morally and ethically wrong is not characterized in the ways that

I have heard this community characterized.

I have sought to believe that the rule of law must be upheld at

all costs, but the rule of law also means the right of American citizens to seek redress in the courts, to seek appeals when they believe that the court has ruled inappropriately. The reason that we

have appellate courts is because they strike down the rulings of

lower courts.

No citizen in this country is told that their rights must be accelerated and/or abrogated, and we rebel as Americans when we hear

that any citizen’s rights have to be abrogated or should be abrogated. Yet, Cuban Americans, and particularly this family that has

sought access to the courts for peaceful resolution of the dispute of

the issues, are told, ‘‘You must accelerate your rights.’’ No other citizen, when they have to file an appeal, is told ‘‘You must accelerate

your rights.’’ Notwithstanding that, this group of American citizens

has sought to go ahead and accelerate their rights, which in some

way abrogates their rights.

You know, I have sought to be consistent on this issue, whether

it is in my opposition to Most Favored Nation trading status in

China, in my support for sanctions in Nigeria, or in my support in

sanctions against the Castro regime. I have joined with my friends

and colleagues to create greater uniformity and fairness in the law,

the immigration laws of this country. And I really, really am distressed to hear that while Cuban Americans are not above the law,

they are certainly not beneath the law.

Let me just briefly talk about the real reason I came here today,

which is to talk about the rights of Cuban children or the lack

thereof. The Castro regime—and I think it is propitious in one

sense that the U.N. Commission on Human Rights is hearing, in

Geneva, testimony about these issues—considers children to be

wards of the state. The state is actually charged with the integral

formation of children and youth. In fact, Article 39 of the Cuban

socialist constitution says that ‘‘the education of children and youth

in the communist spirit is the duty of a society as a whole.’’

To ensure that children are properly indoctrinated, the Cuban

educational system maintains a dossier for each child. The record

reflects whether the family is religious, the extent of the ideological

integration of a child’s parents, what party organizations the parents participate in, whether the child has participated in political

and ideological activities, and the child’s progress in the areas of

ideological, political, and moral education. As Americans, we would

rebel against such a dossier being kept on our children.

Children are also compelled by the state to participate in the

Union of Communist Pioneers, where they are further indoctrinated in communist ideology and required to participate in political

and military readiness activities. At age 10 children must attend

agricultural work camps for 3 months every year, and this happens

regardless of whether or not their parents want to give them up.

The children are taken from their parents mandatorily. At the

escuela al campo they engage in military games in which they

learn how to hold bridges from enemy troops, find land mines,

18

learn how to throw grenades through windows, and participate in

other war or combat simulation games.

Indoctrination aside, the future for Cuban children is not very

bright. Past the age of 7, children no longer receive milk rations

in a country that, when the Soviet Union existed, used to get $6

billion a year, and we did not put more food on the plates of Cuban

families when the Soviet Union was pumping in $6 billion every

year. No, we used it for military adventurism in Latin America and

in Africa.

According to the State Department’s latest Human Rights Report, the government employs forced labor, including that by children. Now, sometimes my colleagues seek to refer to the State Department’s Human Rights Reports when they find it propitious and

ignore them when they do not find it to be propitious. I do not

think we can do that.

The regime claims to prohibit forced and bonded labor by children, but the State Department reports that the government requires children to work without compensation. All students over

age 11 are expected to devote 30 to 45 days of their summer vacation to farm work, laboring up to 8 hours per day.

Now, I just simply want to say there are many other rights that

are violated. I ask unanimous consent to have the full statement

entered into the record so I won’t take up any more time. But I

would hope—and I respect the different views that my colleagues

hold about our policy—that we would watch the language that we

apply to a community.

And I would hope that the same passion would be exercised on

behalf of Mr. Cohen, who is here before us today, whose children

are separated from him by the Castro regime, which refuses to give

them an exit visa as a punishment for his political activities. And

I would hope that we would hear voices on behalf of Milagros CruzCano, an Afro Cuban whose children—or whose child, I should

say—Noemi, is denied her simply as a punishment for her activities inside of Cuba. Then there would be a greater sense of fairness. Then there would be a greater sense of equality. Then maybe

we could move forward.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Menendez appears in the appendix.]

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Menendez, thank you very much.

Let me now recognize Ms. Jackson-Lee.

Ms. JACKSON-LEE. First of all, let me thank the Chairman of this

Committee and the Ranking Member for their extreme kindness in

allowing me to both fit in and to listen. Allow me to give an initial

apology that I may be in and out with hearings that I am now in

the midst of.

I left a hearing that my Committee on Immigration and Claims

was holding, dealing with justice for victims and terrorism, and I

left that because this is an important day. There are no two more

stronger advocates for human rights than both Chairman Smith

and Ranking Member McKinney, so this is an important day for us

to begin unfolding and understanding the human rights issues for

children around the country and around the world.

19

Interestingly enough, might I say to you that I look forward to

the Immigration and Claims Subcommittee holding hearings on the

inequitable ways children are treated under immigration laws. I

am willing to listen and to determine how we can do better.

But I think it is important, since I glean from this hearing that

the focus of the hearing happens to be in conjunction with the actions that are going on now, and I would simply like to raise some

of the issues that I think are held by a large number of people with

a great concern for human rights, and that is that we do believe

that there is merit to the existence of a living and natural father

who has not shown any evidence, in the instance of Elian Gonzalez

in particular, to have been abusive or unfit as a father.

So we can begin to look at the entire question of human rights

for children, in this instance in the country of Cuba, but we can

look for countries around the world. And we can begin to look as

well for the treatment of children who are unaccompanied or come

in a particular manner to this country, and how the INS may or

may not treat them. I look forward to doing that.

In this instance, however, might I share just a few simple points.

We understand just recently that the State court has indicated in

Florida that they have no jurisdiction and that this is not a custody

case. This is, in fact, as we deal with it by the Department of Justice and the INS, a case of seeking asylum.

And the only very narrow issue that we have here—and we understand the difference of opinion. I have always said I respect the

views of Cuban Americans and their right to civil disobedience. I

am a product of that. I have engaged in that, and I respect it. But

this is a question of whether or not a natural parent, not accused

of unfitness or abuse, at least with no documentation, can be allowed to make the determination as to whether or not the minor

child should have asylum. This is all we ask, that Elian and his

father be united. And, Ms. Torres—excuse me, Mr. Cohen—I would

ask no less for you.

And so I would hope that as we look to learn today and we look

to understand today, we will look at the larger and broader picture

of how we treat our children. Might I just add, because I have

worked a lot in children’s issues, I have served as a municipal

court judge, I have engaged in advocacy for children, as many of

us have, and I would only say and ask in a public plea, even in

this hearing, that we have an opportunity or that we focus on the

opportunity for Elian, in this instance, and his father to be reunited, and might I say that the two families be reunited.

And, finally, that we might focus on the difficulty for a 6-yearold to be utilized in any manner that would cause him to be on

public display of words that we may not be aware or may not have

any basis upon whether he has actually said these words, in a public video. I would ask that, whatever position we may have, that

we not utilize those tactics, and that human rights be our priority

for all people, and that we certainly review the status of human

rights for our children.

This is a very important hearing today, and I am very gratified

for the opportunity to have been allowed to make a few remarks.

I yield back. Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Jackson-Lee, thank you very much.

20

I would like to now present our very distinguished panel of seven

witnesses, in the order that they will present their testimonies.

Without objection, all of your full statements will be made a part

of the record, but you can proceed however you like.

Dr. Maria Dominguez is an attorney and the executive director

of the St. Thomas University Human Rights Institute. A published

specialist in immigration and refugee law, Dr. Dominguez has

served on the U.S. delegation to the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva, and has appeared as a witness before several congressional committees and subcommittees. Among her other activities, she was a founding co-chair of the Guantanamo Refugee Assimilation and Self-Sufficiency Project.

The Reverend Lucius Walker, Jr., is the executive director of the

Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization, the founder of Pastors for Peace, and the founding pastor of Salvation Baptist Church in Brooklyn, New York. A long-time protester of the

United States policy toward Cuba, Reverend Walker is the recipient of the Order of Friendship and the Carlos Finley Award conferred on him by the Government of Cuba.

Ileana Fuentes is a feminist author and critic living in Miami.

She originally arrived here from Cuba as 1 of the 14,000 Operation

Pedro Pan refugee children whose parents sent them unaccompanied to this country in the hope that they would find a better life

in the United States.

Jorge Garcia lost 14 members of his family in the Cuban Government’s attack on the ‘‘13th of March’’ refugee tugboat, including his

son and grandson. A Doctor of Education in Cuba, he served as the

director of several schools and education centers in Cuba. After directing an extensive investigation into the ‘‘13th of March’’ killings,

Mr. Garcia testified before the U.N. Human Rights Commission

about that very tragic and despicable incident.

Neri Torres, a native Cuban, is the founder and artistic director

of IFE/ILE, an artistic organization specializing in Afro-Cuban

dance. A graduate of the National School of Arts in Havana, Ms.

Torres is an accomplished dancer and choreographer, and has

worked closely with artists such as Gloria Estefan. During her life

in Cuba, Ms. Torres was also a victim of forced child labor.

Jose Cohen served as an intelligence officer in Cuba for 6 years.

In 1994 he escaped Cuba on a raft and fled to freedom in the

United States. In 1996 his parents, wife and three children were

granted U.S. exit visas. However, during the past 4 years the Castro regime has refused to authorize their exit, holding the family

in Cuba against their will.

Daniel Shanfield is a staff attorney with the Lawyers Committee

for Human Rights, where he overseas the Asylum Program. Prior

to joining the Lawyers Committee, Mr. Shanfield served as a trial

attorney for the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service, as

well as a research assistant for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Geneva. He will be addressing the rule of

law issues, and Members might want to stay on, who have expressed concerns about that, for his testimony.

Doctor.

21

STATEMENT OF MARIA DOMINGUEZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,

ST. THOMAS UNIVERSITY HUMAN RIGHTS INSTITUTE

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. Mr. Chairman, distinguished Members of Congress, I thank you for the opportunity to address you on this very

sensitive and important topic. I would like to particularly recognize

the Representatives from Florida, Congresswoman Ileana RosLehtinen and Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart. A special salute,

too, to Congressman Bob Menendez from New Jersey.

I have prepared a written statement but would like the opportunity to submit a more extensive written testimony for inclusion

in the record.

Mr. SMITH. Doctor, without objection, your full statement and

that of all of our other distinguished witnesses will be made a part

of the record.

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I teach human rights and the law at St. Thomas University in

Florida, and my students have recently studied both the Declaration and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. They were surprised to learn that the United States had not ratified the Convention, but they are also learning that the implementation process is

very difficult and complex.

I have just returned from Geneva, where I attended part of the

annual meeting of the Commission on Human Rights. Some of your

concerns are also the concerns of other countries. I am hopeful that

hearings such as this advance efforts in making human rights a reality for each and every child in the world.

Today, however, I will specifically highlight certain Cuban documents that delineate and set parameters on the civic, political, economic, social, and cultural rights of Cuban children in the island.

I shall start with the 1992 Cuban Constitution, then cover very

briefly the Cuban Code of Childhood and Youth, as well as relevant

articles in the Cuban Family Code.

The Cuban Constitution, as amended in 1992, sets forth the

goals for the Cuban State and its society. Article 1 of Chapter I

states that Cuba is a socialist state of workers. Article 5 further

states that the Communist Party of Cuba, described as MarxistLeninist and as the organized vanguard of the Cuban nation, is the

superior leading force of the society and state, organizing and guiding the common efforts aimed at the highest goals of the construction of socialism and the advancement toward the communist society.

Article 6 describes the Union of Young Communists as an entity

having the preeminent function of promoting the active participation of the young masses in the task of socialist construction.

Under Chapter IV, called ‘‘The Family,’’ Article 38 declares that

Cuban parents have the duty to contribute actively in their children’s integral development as, ‘‘useful, well-prepared citizens for

life in a socialist society.’’

Chapter V, entitled ‘‘Education and Culture,’’ starts with Article

39, which states that ‘‘the State guides, fosters, and promoted education and sciences, in all their manifestations.’’ It lists 10 principles for its educational and cultural policies. I will only highlight

two relevant principles within Article 39.

22

The first one is that the state bases its educational and cultural

policies on Marxist ideology. Second, that the state promotes the

patriotic education and communist training for the new generations, and the preparation of children, young people and adults for

socialist life.

To implement these principles, education is combined with work

and participation in political, social, and military training activities. The state also promotes the participation of its citizens

through the country’s mass and social organizations in the implementation of its educational and cultural policies.

Finally, under Chapter VII, the Cuban Constitution describes

fundamental rights and duties. Article 62 leaves no doubt as to the

major principle laid out throughout the text. It reads, ‘‘None of the

freedoms which are recognized for citizens can be exercised contrary to what is established in the Constitution and the law, or

contrary to the existence and objectives of the socialist state, or

contrary to the decision of the Cuban people to build socialism and

communism. Violation of this principle can be punished by law.’’ The second document I would like to bring to your attention is

the Code of Childhood and Youth, Law No. 16, enacted on June 6,

1978, which is a legally binding document on all minors, parents

and teachers in Cuba. I have identified at least 15 articles which

should be cause for concern, and I strongly recommend that you

read it and analyze it carefully to gain a wider perspective on how

the State controls children’s functions, education and upbringing in

Cuba, above and beyond the parents.

I especially would like to highlight Articles 3, 5, 7 through 10,

18, 20, 23, 33, 40, 68, 83, 90, and 101. All these articles call for

the communist formation of the young generations and the fostering of the ideological values of communism in the youth. I highlight Article 18 in particular because it states that educators have

the elevated mission in the formation of the communist personality.

Article 20 again postulates that the school is the basic educational

institution contributing decisively in the communist formation. The

Code highlights the State entities relationship with mass organizations and the Union of Communist Youth for the purpose of sustaining a coordinated effort in the development of children and

youth.

These Articles lead me to believe and conclude that parental decisions are certainly subservient to the state, and that parents, or

anyone else for that matter, will be punished if found to disagree

with the state’s principle to develop the communist personality in

children and youth. In other words, parents are not free to choose

any alternative lifestyle for their children. Article 62 under the

Constitution makes it very clear.

Furthermore, the Cuban Family Code stipulates under Title II,

Chapter II, entitled ‘‘Relationship between Parents and Children,’’

Section 1, ‘‘Patria Potestas and its Exercise,’’ (which means parental custody) Article No. 85, subsections 2 and 3, that the concept

of Patria Potestas entails the duty of the parent to inculcate the

spirit of internationalism and socialist morality. The socialist concept of the family does not accept the idea of the family as a private contractual union. The primary role of the family in socialist

Cuba is to contribute to the development and upbringing of chilVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
23

dren in accordance with socialist values. Any dissent or attempt to

deviate from this role may be punishable under the law. The Family Code therefore underscores the supremacy of the State’s principles over the parents’ own beliefs and individual decisionmaking

processes.

In practice, all of these legal norms and laws are implemented

through a very rigid and controlled environment. For example, the

child is obligated to carry an identity card that lists all addresses,

schools attended, and political attitude, such as the child’s participation in the Communist Pioneers Association. This ID card serves

the State’s purpose in controlling the child throughout his formative years.

The Cuban State realizes that the early formative years in a

child’s life are crucial for his personality development. Therefore,

parents and the extended family cannot participate in the child’s

education or extracurricular activities which are contrary to the

State’s principles. Another method in implementing the State’s

principles is to transport children throughout the cities and towns

to participate in political activities, and without obtaining parental

consent.

The State also controls children once they are of school age

through another document called a ‘‘Student Cumulative Dossier.’’ The child’s academic, political, and religious behavior is recorded

by the teacher. It also records the parents’ behavior toward religion, their political opinion, their economic standing, the family relations, and much more.

This document also notes the child’s participation in the so-called

voluntary work. Children who are 10 years or older are required

by the State to perform agricultural work at camps in the country

for 3 months every year. Parents have no say in this. Promiscuity

is reported to be rampant at these countryside schools.

I have heard numerous accounts and testimony from parents

who come to live in the United States out of desperation and concern for the lack of control they have over their children’s lives. I

know this because I am an attorney who specializes in U.S. immigration law. In rendering free legal services to the poor, I have encountered many recently arrived Cubans who need help in filling

out their asylum applications. I have learned from them that there

is much desperation to leave the Island because they feel very controlled and do not wish the same fate on their children. What they

hope for their children is to have freedom in their decisionmaking

processes that until their arrival in the United States had eluded

them while in Cuba.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Dominguez appears in the appendix.]

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Doctor. I would just like to

note, we just got an Associated Press off the wire, and I will read

it very briefly. It says, ‘‘A Federal appeals court issued a temporary

stay today that keeps Elian Gonzalez in the United States while

the Government and his relatives fight over whether he will be returned to his father and sent home to Cuba. The order came barely

an hour after the passing of a Government deadline for the boy’s

Miami relatives to hand him over.’’

24

I would like to recognize Reverend Walker.

STATEMENT OF THE REVEREND LUCIUS WALKER, JR., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INTERRELIGIOUS FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION

Rev. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity to

testify before this distinguished Subcommittee.

I was born and raised in the great State of New Jersey, where

I now reside. And, as you are all aware, I am the executive director

of the Interreligious Foundation for Community Organization, a 33-

year-old ecumenical agency which, among other things, has worked

for reconciliation in the area of United States-Cuba relations since

1991. I am also the pastor of the Salvation Baptist Church in

Brooklyn, and have been serving recently as the co-chair of the National Committee for the Return of Elian Gonzalez to His Father

in Cuba.

The issue of rights of children generally, and of course in Cuba,

is an issue about which I am deeply concerned in all aspects of my

work as a pastor, as a certified social worker and a former instructor in social work at the University of Wisconsin, and as a community organizer, as well as a general advocate in the United States

and in poor nations around the world for the rights of children. I

am, as a minister of the gospel of Jesus Christ, particularly concerned with family values, for they are profoundly important to me

and are the cornerstone of any stable society.

I am also very much shaped and formed by some of the tenets

of scripture, and I shall mention two or three of those in the course

of my comments. One I should mention now, and that is the teaching by the prophets, and I quote from Isaiah particularly, that we

should come now and reason together, the purpose being to resolve

any differences among us.

I recognize that this Subcommittee’s interest today is founded in

part on the question of Cuba’s capacity to serve in the healing process for Elian Gonzalez after he returns home. With that in mind,

let me share with you our perspective both at the Interreligious

Foundation and through the National Committee for the Return of

Elian, our perspective on the rights of the child in Cuban society.

This perspective has been formed by extensive time in Cuba,

more than 40 visits to Cuba, the first in 1981 and most of them

in the recent or in the last 10 years. We have worked and worshiped with the Cuban church community. We have visited families. We have talked extensively with the old and the young, persons in all aspects of Cuba’s life, rural and urban, and in the

course of our delivery of more than 2,000 tons of humanitarian aid

to Cuba.

We engage, or we attempt to engage in the work we do in relationship to Cuba, at the urgent and repeated requests of particularly Protestant church leaders whom we have come to know over

the years who, knowing of our work in relationship to suffering

communities in Africa and Central and South America and the

Caribbean, other parts of the Caribbean, requested that we assist

them in addressing the sufferings of their members due to the effects of the United States blockade.

25

We are very much moved by Jesus’s teaching in Matthew 25 that

the ultimate test of Christian discipleship is whether or not one

gives a cup of cold water to the thirsty, food to the hungry, clothes

to the naked, and we are also instructed in our own church teachings that the service according to this mandate from our Lord is

not to be determined by whether the persons who are the recipient

of that humanitarian and spiritual response should themselves be

of the same either political or ideological or social or denominational persuasion as the giver. Jesus suggested that we ought to be

equal in our sharing with all persons, no matter what their own

outlook, no matter what their own political formation, no matter

which political party they belong to, and therefore we are to respect

others whether they are Democrats or Republicans.

Our perspective is also informed by the declarations of the Cuban

Constitution, some of which has been referred to on several occasions today, and by the legal codes as well as by public policy and

practices which we have been privileged to observe in the course

of our relations and visits and time in Cuba. First, a word about

the Cuban Constitution, adopted in 1976 and amended by the

Cuban National Assembly in 1992. It is very explicit on the subjects of family, children, youth, education, culture, and other matters as well.

Article 35 of the Cuban Constitution states that the state recognizes the family as the fundamental cell of society, and attributes

to it essential responsibilities and functions in the education and

formation of new generations. Article 37 affirms the equal rights of

all children, regardless of the circumstances of their birth.

Article 38 states parents have the duty to feed their children, to

assist in the defense of their legitimate interests and in the realization of their just aspirations, as well as to contribute actively to

their education—as well as to contribute actively to their education, the education of their children—and their integral formation as youthful citizens.

Article 40 says children and youth enjoy particular protection on

the part of the state and the society. The church, the school, state

institutions, and mass and social organizations have the duty to

give special attention to the integral formation of children and

youth.

Another source which gives insight into Cuba’s understanding of

the rights of the child is the Family Code of 1975. In Articles 82

through 85 of Law 1289, it is asserted that children are under the

Patria Potestas, the parental rights of their parents; that parental

rights correspond jointly to both parents and accrue to the surviving parent when one parent dies; that children are obligated to

respect, to show consideration for and help their parents, and to

obey them while under their Patria Potestas.

These parental rights also entail the following rights and duties

of parents: to keep their children under their guardianship and

care, making every possible effort to provide them with a stable

home and adequate nutrition, caring for their health and personal

hygiene; to see to the education of their children; to train their children to be useful citizens; to administer and care for their children’s property; and to represent their children at every judicial action.

26

At no point does the Cuban Constitution state that children are

the property of either the state or the parents. It is my understanding, from the reading of these Cuban documents, from talking

with people at all levels and in a variety of professional capacities

in Cuba, that children are not considered property, but rather the

terms that are consistently used in the Constitution, in the Codes,

and in the practices through the courts, are ‘‘priority of,’’ children

are the priority of the state and the family; they are the responsibility of the state and the parents; and that children enjoy particular protection, yes, from the state, but also that protection is

primarily the responsibility of the parents.

It has been my observation that Cuban children, growing up in

a society that is far from perfect, a society that has a long way to

go to even achieve its own objectives of what an ideal society ought

to be, that that society has performed and exercised its responsibilities to its children in such an effective way that children in Cuba

are a wonderful combination of self-awareness, self-esteem, respect

for adults, love of country, knowledge of culture, and understanding

of international geography and history which I wish were equally

true in every part of the world.

I am an observer of human behavior, and as I have observed the

relationships between parents and children, the dignity, the sense

of calm and self-respect and pride with which children are able to

relate to adults in the Cuban society, I am deeply moved. I am

deeply moved as I have witnessed, as this whole Nation has, the

strength in young Elian Gonzalez. Where did he get that strength?

He certainly did not get it within the last 4 months. The strength,

the dignity, the calm, the power of this young child must at least

in major part be attributed to his first 6 years of life in Cuba under

this system of education to which we are now referring. I have

traveled extensively, and in no other country have I ever seen more

healthy children, as well as self-confident, more secure and well-behaved children, as I have seen in Cuba.

The source of this unique regard for children predates the Cuban

Revolution. It traces back for more than 100 years to the founding

father of Cuba, that everyone in Cuba refers to, Jose Marti, the

founding father of modern Cuba, who said, ‘‘The children of Cuba

are our future. Children are the hope of the world.’’

There is, of course, an obvious shortage of consumer goods in

Cuba, and we as citizens of the United States must take responsibility in considerable measure for those shortages because of our

embargo. The values that underlie the response to this shortage in

Cuba is that things are not essential, consumer items are not essential to life, health and education, not so much as are love, nurturing, social responsibility and family values.

Mr. SMITH. Reverend Walker, excuse me for interrupting. We are

asking everyone to keep it around 10 minutes. It is about 13 now.

If you could just sum up, we do want to hear what you have to say,

but if you could just—— Rev. WALKER. I thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, you selected six

of the witnesses, and I got to select Reverend Walker, and I would

love for him to be able to complete his statement and to have his

27

say. He came all the way from New York City to be here, and I

would hate for you to cut him off.

Mr. SMITH. Let me just say to the gentlelady from Georgia, nobody is seeking to cutoff Reverend Walker.

Reverend Walker, how much more time do you need?

Rev. WALKER. Three minutes.

Mr. SMITH. That would be fine.

Rev. WALKER. It is my observation that in Cuba, education and

health care are considered basic human rights. In the Helsinki Accords, human rights are outlined in political and then in economic,

social or cultural categories. I think Cuba has a long way to go in

refining its human rights and its work in the area of the political

aspect of human rights. In the area of social, economic, cultural

rights, it excels, and we should recognize that. And it is in this

area, as well as the strivings that it openly and publicly seeks to

make in the political and the other aspects of its life, as it refines

its own electoral system, for example, that young Elian would be

nurtured and developed.

Remember that Cuba came into and inherited from a dictatorship which our own country had supported, it inherited a situation

in which 60 births out of 1,000 were dead births. The infant mortality rate was 60 per 1,000. It has reduced that to an amount

equal to the United States. It is higher in this category than any

other country in this region of the world.

It has created more hospitals, it produces more doctors, it cares

for the health of its children in such a profoundly significant way,

that we see that health reflected in Elian and we see it reflected

in the children of Cuba. I have never seen an unhealthy child in

Cuba. I have never seen a child in Cuba that was the prototypical

Third World child.

Cuba has something to teach us, and it offers the gift of its care

for its children to Elian as well as to all of its children; not only

to its own children, but someone referred to internationalism. Cuba

produces more doctors than it needs in order that it might export

medical care to the rest of the world. When the revolution in Cuba

triumphed, there were 3,000 doctors. Now there are 66,000, 1 for

every 170 residents, and it is the only country in the world which

is shipping doctors by the thousands to the Third World to assist

in the development of health indices in those countries.

And so it is into this context that we would send young Elian.

It is into this context, in which there is a vibrant church, in which

there are people of active faith, in which there are people with concern for the continued development of all aspects of democracy and

well-being, that young Elian would be going.

We have also heard rumors that Cuban children are being taken

from their families at the tender age of 8 or 11 and shipped off to

mandatory labor camps with harsh working conditions. I would like

to offer a more accurate picture of current reality. Cuban children

in junior high school and high school do spend a month of their

school year in the countryside. During this time they attend school

for half of the day and help bring in the harvest for the other half.

Richard Nuchio, former Cuban Advisor to President Clinton and

to Senator Torricelli, describes this program as a sort of national

service corps, AmeriCorps, volunteer brigade, something like in

28

some communities the Boy Scout programs in the United States.

Interestingly, the need for this assistance with farm labor has arisen in part because on the one hand of the level of education and

the high level of professionalism in Cuba, and because of the negative impact of our own blockade of Cuba.

Mr. Chairman, I would propose that we consider several directions for resolving the problems and the concerns we have about

the climate and the context in which Elian would be returned.

First of all, I would urge that we recognize the right of this child’s

father under Cuban law, under United States law and social welfare practice, to be the guardian of the child.

Second, I would urge that we not politicize this issue, but we see

the great human tragedy that has been perpetrated upon this

child. And that which we might do in our political discourse to help

this child in his tragedy would be to work assiduously, seriously for

the normalization of relations, in order that all of the differences

we have with Cuba, all of the criticisms which have been and will

be lodged here today can be discussed in a mutually respectful bilateral relationship, rather than throwing of darts across the waters, talking past each other, and using rhetoric which will exacerbate the problem for the time to come, rather than resolve the

problem and heal the breach between our two countries.

Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Reverend Walker, thank you very much.

Mr. Garcia.

STATEMENT OF JORGE GARCIA, FORMER DOCTOR OF EDUCATION IN CUBA, LOST 14 MEMBERS OF HIS FAMILY IN THE

ATTACK ON THE ‘‘13 DE MARZO’’ REFUGEE TUGBOAT

Mr. GARCIA [speaking through an interpreter]. Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. Thank you to the distinguished Congresspersons who

are sitting here in this Committee.

Today is a very sad day for me. Today it has been, it is the anniversary, 69 months have elapsed today since the sinking of the

‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat back in 1997, if I am not mistaken. Each

day of this month my family pays tribute to this memory. We went

to the sea, we went out to sea to throw flowers in the ocean in

memory of our dead. I believe that my presence here today is a way

of honoring their memory, as well, and I thank God for having

given me the opportunity to be here with you today so that I may

share with you my experience.

I lost 14 family members in the sinking of the ‘‘13th of March’’

tugboat. I come from a family of teachers. My wife and I both are

teachers. We are not an antisocial element, as we were classified

by the Cuban Government. The first news released by the Cuban

Government about this incident said a ship, a boat, capsized in

Cuban waters, carrying antisocial elements of our society. Can

there be children who are an antisocial element?

I investigated at length the details of this event. The theory of

the government was and is that this had been an accident. In reality, this was a crime. The government, through Lieutenant Colonel Aspide, who headed the government’s investigating team,

blamed an excess of weight on the tugboat for its sinking, for its

going down; the age of the tugboat, how old it was.

29

I don’t want to go into too many details or too much depth with

this, but I only want to appeal to your understanding of this situation. Can the ‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat, could it have been, could the ‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat been more fragile than the little boat ‘‘Granma’’ used by Fidel Castro at the beginning of the revolution

to land in Cuba?

The ‘‘Granma’’ boat traveled thousands of kilometers carrying 82

men on board before it got—to get to Cuban shores. It carried

weapons, munitions and supplies. It navigated for 6 days and it

reached its target, it reached its destination. The ‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat barely traveled 7 miles. Its journey lasted 50 minutes, and

it was sunk.

What followed the sinking of the ‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat for my

family was truly a tragedy. Lieutenant Colonel Aspide proposed to

us that we accept a luxurious residence in the plush neighborhood

of Seewoney in Havana because the family would be more tranquil,

more at peace in such a neighborhood. It also offered us a car and

medical services. This was a proposal that Lieutenant Colonel

Aspide made personally to me, and what I really wanted was the

return of the 14 corpses. I did not accept the house, and I never

got the bodies either. That is why I have affirmed that Castro is

a kidnapper of corpses.

I want to go on reflecting on our experience, my experience and

my wife’s experience as teachers. We have always worked in the

teaching profession. Nobody who has not lived in Cuba can really

speak about Cuban reality. Cuban reality has to be experienced

from within, not just on periodic visits.

And I would like to assure you that Cuban education is spartan

in nature, and I can affirm that from all the years of experience

as an educator. An official saying sums it all up: ‘‘To study, to

work, and to carry a rifle.’’ We could call this a subtle way of child

abuse.

Instead of continuing to talk about these issues, I am willing to

answer any questions that you may have. I have researched the

‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat sinking extensively, and I am here to answer any questions that you may have later. Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Garcia appears in the appendix.]

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Garcia, thank you very, very much.

Ms. Fuentes.

STATEMENT OF ILEANA FUENTES, FEMINIST AUTHOR AND

CRITIC, MIAMI, FLORIDA, SURVIVOR OF ‘‘OPERACION PEDRO

PAN’’

Ms. FUENTES. Mr. Chairman, distinguished Members of Congress, I thank you also for the opportunity to address you on the

sensitive and urgent issue of children in Cuba. I would like to recognize particularly the Representatives from Florida, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart,

as well as my former Representative from New Jersey, Congressman Robert Menendez.

I would like to echo, parenthetically, the distress expressed by

Congressman Menendez. As a constituent, as an American citizen,

and as one who has come to this hearing to help educate this Committee on the issue of Cuban children, it has belittled and insulted

30

us, the five individuals sitting at this table who are Cuban Americans, to have been encapsuled in the term ‘‘mob intransigence.’’ I

would like to request that every Member of this Subcommittee return our generosity in being here with an equal measure of respect,

and I thank you in advance for that.

I have prepared a statement from which I will read.

First and foremost, a child born in Cuba enters this world in a

society where his or her fundamental human rights, as guaranteed

by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and by three United

Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child, are denied by all

existing legal instruments, namely the Constitution of the Republic

of Cuba, the Children and Youth Code, the Cuban Family Code,

and the Cuban Penal Code.

Having said this, let me say that while a child is born in Cuba,

he joins a family living in state-sponsored poverty. The greater majority of Cuban families are poor even by Third World standards.

The average salary of a Cuban worker is equivalent to $100 to

$120 dollars, in an economy that was ‘‘dollarized’’ back in 1993

when Fidel Castro himself decriminalized the tenure of American

currency. In comparison, the average salary in Bangladesh is

equivalent to $250.

Thus, a child’s arrival throws a family into chaos, for this new

mouth further aggravates a severely rationed food basket. He or

she shall encounter shortages in every aspect and stage of life from

the onset. In fact, women across Cuba made sure that lack of baby

and infant needs be a priority on the agenda in last March’s Federal of Cuban Women’s Congress. Infant and postpartum mothers’ unmet needs were on the agenda, second only to the total absence

of sanitary napkins from the people’s market.

These hardships are perhaps one reason why so many women in

Cuba resort to abortions. That, and the practice of persuading

women to terminate potentially troublesome pregnancies early on,

could explain why 40 percent of all pregnancies end in an abortion

in the island.

No one should be fooled by Cuba’s statistics on infant mortality

rate. Those statistics are improved, a priori, by the elimination of

difficult pregnancies and childbirth. In light of this manipulation,

Cuba’s infant mortality rate, which is between 9 and 11, depending

whether it is boys or girls, in 100,000 births, doesn’t fare so well

if compared to countries where no such manipulation occurs, such

as Costa Rica, Chile and Uruguay, where the rate is 12, 13 and 17

respectively.

A child born in Cuba has a life expectancy of 75 to 78, depending

on its sex, but it is about the same, it is even better in some, in

countries like Costa Rica, Chile, Uruguay and Argentina.

Cuban children have fewer opportunities to be given religious upbringing or to be baptized. The Cuban Constitution and the Penal

Code both call for sanctions, including prison terms, against individuals who put their religious beliefs before duty to communism.

There are no vibrant churches of any denomination in Cuba, not

Catholic, not Protestant, not Jewish, not Abacoir, not Santeria.

Between the ages of 1 and 7, the average Cuban child will have

a poor diet, lack appropriate shoes and clothing, and will be at

want for basic medications against such common childhood ailVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
31

ments, ear and throat infections, head lice, and skin conditions

such as scabies and impetigo. If a child is an asthma sufferer or

needs antibiotic treatment, the prescriptions needed are not available in the people’s pharmacy. They can be purchased, however, at

dollar-only stores reserved for foreign personnel and tourists.

Do not be fooled by those who insist that food and medicine are

lacking in Cuba because of the United States embargo. Cuba is a

natural producer of just about everything in the food chain except

wheat, which it used to import from the United States prior to

1959, and from the Soviet Bloc countries until recently. Communist

Cuba fails to feed its people because four decades of Castro-designed economics have destroyed Cuban agriculture and industry.

As for medicines, Cuba’s pharmaceutical industry is an exporting

and revenue-producing enterprise. Its clientele is mostly Third

World countries like Jamaica and Nicaragua. Cuba can, and has,

purchased medical supplies and drugs at much cheaper prices in

Central America, Canada and Europe, if it had any purchasing

power at all. The United States pharmaceutical market is not even

cost effective for us, who are its captive clientele.

When a child reaches 7, the age of reason, two very unreasonable

things happen to him or to her. One, the milk quota is suspended.

Two, the Organization of Cuban Pioneers kicks in as the first mass

organization to control the life of the individual. What are the

Young Pioneers? According to the Children and Family Code, Article 102, it is ‘‘a volunteer organization that coordinates tasks and

activities to complement the formation of the communist personality.’’ A Young Pioneer must wear a red scarf around his neck, or her

neck; declare that Fidel, and not God, is the father of all Cuban

children; and repeat at every paramilitary meeting, ‘‘Pioneers of

communism, we vow to be like Che.’’ This is the first identity and personality crisis a Cuban child-person must confront, for to be like Che, a white, non-Cuban, genocidal male, must surely pose an identity crisis for little black boys,

whose role model should be the great 19th century liberator, General Antonio Maceo, or Martin Morua Delgado, another illustrious

black Cuban man, elected first president of the Cuban Senate in

1905.

And what of little girls, black or white, who are told to be like

a white man in fatigues? What kind of gender identity violation is

this, to have as national role models a roster of white, Eurocentric,

war-mongering males?

Black Cuban children also hope to have what the white children

of the white government elite have, and what some white Cuban

children with access to United States dollars also have.

In school, the child learns to read with an alphabet that enshrines that roster. ‘‘F’’ is for Fidel, also for fusil, rifle. ‘‘C’’ is for

Che. ‘‘Gu’’ is for guerrilla. ‘‘M’’ is for Marx, ‘‘L’’ is for Lenin, ‘‘S’’ is

for socialism, ‘‘P’’ is for patria, which spells fatherland.

This child’s progress will be charted in a personal file that will

follow him or her throughout his or her life. In that file will be recorded not only his young revolutionary zeal, but that of the parents as well. Only good Communists will advance in the educational ladder. Only they will pursue the career of their choice.

32

The file accompanies the child to junior high school, la escuela al

campo, the farm schools.

Between the ages of 12 and 14, children are removed from the

custody of parents and sent to study and work in farm schools designed to give a child an education while extolling hundreds of unpaid child-labor hours in return. Parents can visit on the weekend,

if they find transportation, of course. Children go home every 4 to

6 weeks. This is the time Cuban children officially pass into state

custody, as these farm schools are mandatory.

Parents and children who violate this mandate forfeit their right

to higher education, for the famous file will reflect, ‘‘deviant ideological behavior unbecoming a good Cuban revolutionary.’’ The university, Fidel Castro said years ago, is only for revolutionaries. The

Federation of University Students, a mass organization, upheld the

dictum on April 10th, just a few days ago, at their sixth Congress.

After the Pioneers are outgrown, two other organizations become

the obligatory course: the Federation of Intermediate School Students, and the Federation of University Students I just mentioned.

Then there is the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution,

the Federation of Cuban Women, the National Association of Small

Farmers. For a Cuban to have any life at all, he or she must belong

to at least one of these. It is an obligation for children and young

adults to be militants of the Cuban Government, and that includes

compulsory volunteer work while a student.

Do not be fooled by those who insist that health care and education are free in Communist Cuba. Cubans pay for these social

services through hundreds of unpaid man and woman-hours of

forced volunteer labor in the fields, in the territorial militia, in national guard duty, in community-based services.

For boys, the 15th birthday can be traumatic. That is the age

they are set aside for the draft. Although women can join the

armed forces, and in fact do, only boys are subject to the draft. On

their 16th birthday, boys must report to duty. From age 16 to 19,

young men cannot leave Cuba. The military stakes its claim on his

life and allegiance. Thousands of male Cuban teenagers have gone

to jail for violating this requirement. They are marked for a life of

ostracism in a system rigged for loyal revolutionaries only.

A word about young women, and I am almost through. I regret

that I must end on an even more tragic note. For teenage girls, life

in Cuba is a double jeopardy. In spite of education, without U.S.

dollars, no family can make ends meet in the island. The reported

$800 million that the exile community contributes to the livelihood

of relatives in Cuba touches, at best, 10 percent of the population.

I should add, the white population, for the exile community around

the world is mostly white-European. So must be their relatives in

the island. But the island’s population of 12 million people is believed to be about 60 percent Afro Cuban.

Conditions in Cuba therefore translate into three realities that

are gender-specific, in that they affect the life choices of young

Cuban women and girls. Three points.

Women marry earlier in Cuba than in any other country in the

hemisphere, age 191⁄2, but they delay motherhood to avoid the

struggle of feeding another mouth. This means women must resort

to birth control, and in many cases to multiple abortions, in order

33

to remain childless. Women bear the burden of birth control in

Cuba, for Cuban men are traditionally reluctant to condoms, much

less to vasectomies. The health implications, therefore, are a woman’s issue in Cuba.

Suicide, No. 2, is the third cause of death for Cuban female teenagers ages 15 to 19, usually related to early pregnancy or motherhood. In the global context, let me add that the rate of suicide

among Cuban women in the island is the highest in the world, one

woman for every many who commits suicide.

In order to alleviate poverty, the third and final point, Cuban

women as young as 13 and 14 choose to engage in prostitution with

a foreign clientele in order to generate United States dollars. This

has resulted in a rise of sexually transmitted diseases in female

teenagers. The practice of abortions on girls as young as 12 and 13

was reported last fall by the Young Communist Union in Cuba,

weekly paper, Juventud Rebelde.

This testimony, to close, could fill reams of paper, not only with

academic and legal analysis of the literature but with interviews

and personal accounts from children and young adults who have

lived through and escaped the fate that awaits Elian Gonzalez, a

fate that a brave young woman named Elizabeth Brotons wanted

her son to avoid. Unfortunately for all of us, it looks like she may

not succeed.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Fuentes appears in the appendix.]

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Fuentes, thank you very much for your testimony.

I regret to say there are two votes on the floor of the House that

will require us to have a very brief recess. We will return and reconvene the hearing and then get to questioning. I thank you for

your patience. The fact that there were so many Members here, especially at the outset, shows, I think, the heightened sense of concern.

I know that in my own research for this hearing, while I had

heard tangentially in the Country Reports about the Cuban Code

of the Child and other kinds of documents, I had not known its full

implications until this hearing and until I began doing some research earlier in the week. Hopefully, many Americans will be educated that there is such a thing. When we are talking about parental rights or lack thereof, this kind of document would be an absolute non-starter in the United States. It is antithetical to everything that we believe to be parental rights, and we will get into

that when we reconvene.

Thank you.

[Recess.]

Mr. SMITH. I want to apologize for the interruption with the

votes. The Subcommittee will resume its sitting, and at this point

I would like to welcome Mr. Cohen, if he would make his presentation to the Subcommittee.

Ms. FUENTES. I am going to translate for him, if that is OK.

34

STATEMENT OF JOSE COHEN, FORMER CUBAN INTELLIGENCE

OFFICER, WHOSE FAMILY ARE HOSTAGES IN CUBA

Mr. COHEN [speaking through an interpreter]. Thank you, Mr.

Chairman. I thank God that I can thank God, after 30 years of living in a virtual prison. I have been living in this country for 6

years, and I thank God every day for having given me the opportunity to be a free man, something that was only a dream to me

for many, many years in Cuba.

The person who addresses you today is not a Cuban expert

quoted often by journalists, academicians and experts who do a lot

of research and come up with a lot of official statistics. That is not

who I am. Of course, when they deal with official data and statistics, they are the statistics given by the Cuban Government. Anyone who tries to explain Cuban reality based on the information

that the Cuban Government itself releases is truly wrong. It is

truly not accurate.

I was born in the year 1964, 5 years after the triumph of the revolution. At 4 years of age, I too said, ‘‘Pioneers for communism, we

shall be like Che.’’ I was proud of that red scarf, not knowing what

communism really was about. I received military training when I

was 12 years old, and they taught us the ways of the guerrilla warfare. That is Cuban reality.

A little while ago Mr. Garcia said something similar, that in

order to talk about Cuban reality, one really had to know it. If you

really want to know what happens to a person that decides to

speak about Cuban reality, if you really want to understand what

would happen to Elian’s father if he were to decide to stay in the

United States, then you have to see my case.

The only thing I have done is, I made a decision to live according

to the dictates of my conscience, to denounce what I was a victim

of for 30 years. Sometimes people say, ‘‘So-and-so expresses himself

this way, so-and-so expresses himself the other way. They are probably bad people.’’ And I said, ‘‘No, they are not bad people. They

are Americans who live in freedom, with false information. They

are not bad people. If they knew what I know, they would not say

what they say or think the way they think.’’ That is why I respect

everyone’s opinion.

And I am impressed, really taken by how in this chamber or in

a university or in a symposium, people can do what nobody can do

in Cuba. I say that I thank God that we can thank God. I also

thank God that all of you were born and were able to live in this

freedom. If we lived in Cuba, many of us would be in prison. It

doesn’t matter what you think. If you dare to speak freely, one

would be in prison. If I had not left Cuba on a raft, I would be in

prison or I would be dead. That is Cuban reality.

I managed to escape as the only option to save my life, because

I saw and I was a witness more than once, how people who had

believed truly in the Cuban Revolution dared to speak their truth

one day and were disappeared on the next day. The Cuban Government not only betrays its own ministers, its own dignitaries or its

generals, the Cuban Government not only shoots its generals, the

Cuban Government, make no mistake about it, would betray any

collaborator, any person who would speak freely.

35

The price I have had to pay for this honesty, for this talking my

truth, has been a 6-year separation from my family. I have never

engaged in any military action against Cuba or prepared any terrorist activity against Cuba. The only thing I have ever done, I ever

did, was to come to this country, decide to come to this country so

that my children would have a better life, and so that my children

would not suffer what I had to suffer.

I came to this country motivated by the things that I could observe when I started to work in the Cuban Intelligence Section.

When I started to, when I learned what really happened, what the

reality was with foreign investors, with tourists, with foreigners in

Cuba, or when I saw how Pastors for Peace, for instance, would go

to Cuba, could go to Cuba, defying United States law, I said my

children have to be able to enjoy such freedom.

And when investors came to Cuba with good intentions, believing

in Cuba, believing in the Revolution, and they used to be invited

out for a night of partying at, for example, Tropicana Night Club,

and they would take their information. I was witness to that reality. I didn’t know how to explain to my children in the future,

‘‘Daddy, didn’t you realize this whole thing, the reality of this?’’ My

conscience was burdened with such a predicament.

But I have had to pay a very high price for all of this. My wife,

my parents, my three little children, we are talking about three

children, one woman, and two elderly Cubans, they are in effect

prisoners in Cuba. Yes, they are prisoners because they are at

home, without an ability to work, subjected to government harassment, without the press ever knowing about it, nobody knowing

about it.

When the government threw my daughter out of school, expelled

my daughter from school; or when the mass demonstrations started

in Cuba and the littlest, the youngest daughter was forced to go to

the rallies in favor of Elian’s return; when my wife receives threatening letters or a threatening note, and my 6-year-old picks them

up and reads them; honestly, can anybody believe that the Castro

Government is really interested in the fate of any child? Can anyone think or believe that the government of Fidel Castro is interested in the Cuban family?

Elian is a symbol, and I can assure you that Fidel Castro is very,

very interested in destroying that symbol. If Elian returns to Cuba,

if his rights to tell his story and his case in court are denied him,

believe me, from the bottom of my heart, that Elian will suffer exactly what I suffered. He will return to Cuba without a mother,

without a father, to the hands of a tyrant.

I am here so that you can get a glimpse at what can happen in

Cuba, what could happen to your own children, to your family, to

your wife, when you decide to speak your truth. I lived 30 years

in Cuba. At 18, God was Castro. That is why I thank God for being

in this country. And I hope, and I thank you in advance, I thank

all of you, any one of you in advance for anything that you can do

on behalf of Elian, and on behalf of my family, that they may also

reach freedom.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cohen appears in the appendix.]

36

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much for that very heartbreaking

story. I can assure you we will do everything we can, with what

limited resources we have available. And I would hope, and I mean

this very sincerely, that those people who do have access to Castro,

would avail themselves not just of helping your family but also

other families who have been hurt so severely by Fidel Castro. I

am very much moved by your statement, and Mr. Garcia, by your

earlier testimony as well.

I would like to ask Ms. Torres to begin, if she would.

STATEMENT OF NERI TORRES, DANCER AND CHOREOGRAPHER, FORMER VICTIM OF FORCED CHILD LABOR IN

CUBA

Ms. TORRES. Thank you, Congressman Smith, for having me

here. It is an honor. My specialty is not talking, it is dancing, but

I will do my best to express what the conditions were like when

I lived in Cuba.

Like I say, my name is Neri Torres. I am a choreographer. I left

Cuba in 1990 via Italy, due to the fact that Cuban Security found

out that I was leaving and kidnapped me. They put me in a psychiatric institution for 4 days, and I received all kinds of tortures

from the Italian manager, who said that I had to be grateful to the

Revolution for the things that I had.

And there is an old Congo saying. I mention Congo because we

in Cuba have many ethnic African groups that are part of our ancestors. They say, ‘‘Seeing is believing,’’ and if you don’t live in

Cuba, like they say, there is no way that you will experience it and

it is hard to convince people about it.

I grew up in a very active environment with intellectuals and

politicals. In my home, it was the headquarters of the equivalent

here of the Black Panthers. My sister was part of the group, and

many other people were too. Some of them live in Miami. Some

others now live in Cuba, and they had to be removed of that, and

they were really active.

They were trying to create a new system for the black people, a

new government for the black people. I experienced all that while

I grew up. They were shot, and taken through Social Services. The

people in Social Services tried to give them a lot of work for them

to forget that they were doing something against the government,

and not to call the attention that they were black people trying to

do a new government.

And in any case it just came to my attention because I am seeing

a lot of African-Americans that are maybe dazzled by the Cuban

system and politics, about black Cubans, and I have seen the black

Cubans earn their place in Cuban society by fighting many years

of war in the 19th century to expel the Spanish colonization. I am

proud of how somebody in my family was part of that army, and

it is still in my veins, that spirit. And the stories through all of the

elderlies, elderlies in my family have told me of stories about betrayal and racism that Cuba couldn’t escape because we are also

part of the universe and race is part of the universe, the universe

or culture we have now.

Anyway, let me go back to the point. I came to talk about my

personal experience about child labor in Cuba, during the days

37

when we were not aware of the many dangers and pressures in our

young lives. Our teacher and system made us feel that we were

being part of a party. However, our parents were desperate to obtain medical papers, since only a chronic disease could stop you

from going to the fields.

There are no written laws. We in Cuba all followed or feared

something that was everywhere and yet nowhere, like that famous,

when he was the director, movie called ‘‘The Exterminator Angel.’’

Paranoia is very deep inside Cubans for half a century. The hospitality and warmth of Cuban idiosyncrasy has been manipulated

against Cubans themselves.

Our parents tried to protect us the best they can, but the system

has used the customary network of neighbors to make each other’s

life miserable and unbearable. People spy on you. They report if

you didn’t go to the fields or to a meeting, to the Plaza de la

Revolucion, etc. Later on this will have repercussions in your life

as a grownup, when you aspire for a career or a job, or which is

the biggest privilege, travel abroad.

My neighbor, Julia Joya, now deceased, happened to be part of

this incidence I lived. Julia ironically deceased due to the complication of somebody stepping on her foot at a meeting with Castro at

the Plaza de la Revolucion. She would follow me everywhere for a

long period of time. This was after my sister and brother abandoned Cuba through Mariel.

I lived in continuous fear, up to a point that I had to confront

her. I told her that she knew I wasn’t a criminal. She saw me

growing up and my family was very decent, only that my parents

never belonged to the CDR, ‘‘Comite ́ de defensa de la revolucion,’’

Defense Committee of the Revolution, and that was a bad spot in

your life. Her reply was, ‘‘If the State wants to follow you, I follow

you.’’ I said, ‘‘But you are not the State.’’ And then things stopped,

to be more calm.

She had to put many people in jail before. Faustino, a rebel teenager, was one of them, only because he was black and he wouldn’t

go to school. His mother had a heart attack and died because of the

incident.

Education and health in Cuba is a Machiavellian manipulation

that holds captive Cuban citizens under the name of gratefulness.

What is Escuela al Campo? It starts at age 11 to 12, and it doesn’t

stop until college. You have to go and serve for 45 days, work in

the fields.

And the inexperience of teenagers and the lack of proper supervision would be the source of several accidents, such as death due

to falls in unsecured wells, the most common. The boys would escape to visit the girls’ camp and run in the dark for several kilometers, and in Cuba the wells are not properly covered so there

were many deaths of teenagers running and escaping through the

fields.

There is danger on the crops were where we travel in trucks. We

had to achieve a certain goal of filling boxes of potatoes, tomatoes,

or in the many harvests they would figure out what they wanted

us to do. Later on it would be working in the cane fields with machetes, when we were to the age of college, ‘‘preuniversitario.’’

38

Our parents would visit us only on Sundays to bring us clean

clothes, food, supplies, and their love to soften our homesickness,

but before arriving they had to struggle to get several buses in

time, waking up in the wee hours of the morning.

I passed out, like many other children, in certain works. The sun

was very hot, the food was not good, and the health conditions

were not ideal. It took me a long time to decide to do my basis, the

first time that I went there. I for sure was comparing my sanitary

toilet at home with that smelly hole in the floor, surrounded by all

kinds of bugs. Cold showers were the prize of the day.

Moreover, I developed allergies, and children were sick often but

many times the teachers wouldn’t take us too seriously. Moreover,

there were cases of pregnancy that was kept quiet to the system

convenience, quiet. The case I witnessed was that of my next door

neighbor that was like me, 14 years old at that time, who had to

marry her physics teacher from who she was pregnant.

Many parents tried to get a doctor’s dismissal, which is the only

valid reason to stop their sons from going to the fields. Unluckily,

this wasn’t possible for all.

The sugar cane cutting, the macheteros voluntarios, we would

call it obligontario, which is the term for obligatory, involuntary. So

we created obligonatario.

When you go to the college, then you go to an even harder work, ‘‘trabajo productivo.’’ This work happened at any time, and the people who plan to leave Cuba are fired from their jobs and sent to

the sugar cane or coffee fields. I remember my mother going crazy

with us five minors at home when my father’s work, they took him

to be a machetero, a cane cutter, for several months. The money

was not coming in time.

Escuela al Campo became ‘‘Escuela en el Campo,’’ so it was

school in the country fields, a permanent state where work-study

was combined. The idea was to strengthen the spirit of the teenager, and also repay the free education that the government provides. As you may know, teenagers are not too good for work, and

I remember that we were ‘‘majaseando,’’ like being lazy and trying

to figure out how to avoid to work in the fields. Still, we had to

work. At some point we had to work because there were supervision in the fields.

The government created a dismemberment of the family nucleus

in Cuba soon after Fidel Castro took over. Divide and conquer

seemed to be the source of power of the Cuban Revolution. An example of Operation Peter Pan, where parents send their children

on long-term flight to another country was transforming in.

Also there were parents that were forced to leave without their

children. These children were won over by the Revolution. They

made them ‘‘pioneros por el comunismo,’’ pioneers. Thus, the children decided not to join their parents in America and the government would take them from their parents. They became Hijos de

la Patria, sons of the fatherland.

Then from outrageous despoilment of the Patria Potestas, parental jurisdiction, I know the case of Anna Maria Barerres, my sister’s friend, who was always a dysfunctional adult due to the trauma she suffered when she realized she was not to see her father

again.

39

Also, during Mariel there were many mothers and fathers that

were sent against their will to this country, leaving behind a mountain of children. I can mention the dichotomy of many mothers

when the fathers denied signing the child’s permission to leave the

country. They had to choose between leaving the children behind

or staying.

Children have been manipulated like anything else in Castro

government. The image that Cuban Government wants to create is

totally different from reality. I can only pray that all the Cuban

children can enjoy a brighter future, like all children in the world.

And like me, when I look through my little piece of sky in the window of my bedroom, they are able to see beyond the blue and make

their dreams come true. Most important, I wish they were able to

establish and determine their dreams, at least find their lives in

their own manner, find them the right to self-determination.

Thank you very much.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. Torres. We appreciate

your testimony.

I will ask our next witness if he would proceed.

STATEMENT OF DANIEL SHANFIELD, STAFF ATTORNEY, LAWYERS COMMITTEE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS, IN CHARGE OF THE

ASYLUM PROGRAM

Mr. SHANFIELD. Chairman Smith and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for convening this hearing and for inviting

us to share our views about this important and complex issue. We

are deeply appreciative to you for your steadfast attention to

human rights issues, in particular your concern for the plight of

refugees, and for your continued efforts to highlight these concerns

in Congress.

The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights is a nonprofit, nongovernmental organization. A substantial focus of our work over

the years has been the protection of refugees. The Lawyers Committee has represented many hundreds of refugees, including children.

Since the pilgrims first landed almost 400 years ago, the United

States has served as a refuge for those fleeing persecution and oppression. After World War II, when the United States and so many

other nations failed to protect many refugees from Nazi persecution, the United States led the effort to establish a structure of universally recognized human rights norms, beginning with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights provides

that everyone has the right to seek and enjoy asylum in other

countries from persecution. Building on the recognition of this right

as universal, the United States then worked to establish international standards for the protection of refugees. More than 30

years ago, the United States formally bound itself to these standards by acceding to the protocol of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

The central obligation undertaken by the United States and

other state parties to the treaty was to refrain from returning any

refugee to a place where his life or freedom would be threatened.

This obligation was codified into U.S. law by the 1980 Refugee Act,

40

which also set out a framework for the independent adjudication,

free from political considerations, of claims for refugee status.

Although not everyone who seeks protection is entitled to asylum, international legal obligations require states at minimum to

provide fair and effective procedures to determine who is a refugee.

The United States has repeatedly reaffirmed its commitment to

this principle, although recent changes to U.S. asylum law, such as

expedited removal, place the United States out of step with its tradition of fairness and compassion toward refugees.

Fair legal procedures and access to legal remedies serve as the

foundation for many international legal instruments to which the

United States is a party, such as the Universal Declaration on

Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as well as our own domestic jurisprudence. Moreover,

for these rights to be effective, adequate procedures must be available to permit their enjoyment.

The Refugee Act of 1980 reflected Congress’ concern for providing

access to a fair procedure by explicitly providing that any alien

physically present in the United States may apply for asylum. This

right to seek asylum has subsequently been subjected to very limited and statutorily defined exceptions, but importantly, Congress

has never deprived children of the right to seek asylum.

Like their adult counterparts, child asylum seekers flee their

homelands to escape war, persecution, and political instability. The

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees estimates that

children make up more than half the world’s refugee and internally

displaced population, accounting for a population of 20 million children. The situation is acute. Out of this population, an estimated

250,000 of these refugee children are separated from their parents.

Although only a small fraction of this group seeks refuge in the

United States, the need to ensure adequate protection in our laws

for this vulnerable group is paramount.

Unfortunately, the factors that turn children into refugees are

more prevalent and diverse now than at any time since World War

II. Where child refugees were once bystanders in adult conflicts,

this is increasingly not the case. As witnessed in China, Kosovo

and Sierra Leone, and so many other countries around the world,

children are the deliberate targets of human rights abuses, including infanticide, conscription, ritual genital mutilation, slave labor,

and sexual servitude.

As so eloquently described in the excellent article by Jacqueline

Bhabha and Wendy Young entitled, ‘‘Through A Child’s Eyes: Protecting the Most Vulnerable Asylum Seekers,’’ unaccompanied children who must make their way to safety without the assistance of

their parents are most at risk. I would ask that a copy of this article be entered into the record of this hearing.

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, Mr. Shanfield, that will be made

a part of the record.

Mr. SHANFIELD. Particularly problematic are cases where parents

are incapable of protecting their children from persecution, or

worse, where parents are complicit in that persecution. For instance, female genital mutilation is generally conducted at the behest of a young girl’s parents. In a number of traditional societies,

girls are targeted as the victims of honor killings for opposing their

41

subjugation to demeaning social roles. To illustrate, one of our clients was held captive in her father’s home and regularly beaten

just for resisting his authority to marry her off against her will.

Children asylum seekers who have friends or relatives in the

United States to guide them through our byzantine asylum system

are surely the fortunate ones. However, many are not so lucky, and

in the case of an unaccompanied child asylum seeker, their protection from persecution demands a vigilant and pro-active approach.

Many children are simply unable to articulate their need for protection, given their youth, lack of sophistication, and unfamiliarity

with our culture. Identification of child asylum seekers is therefore

a key responsibility. Once identified, these children must be provided with assistance to effectuate their rights to refugee protection.

Parents’ rights are fundamental, but they are not absolute. We

have seen many instances where parents of child refugees are either incapable, because of intense pressure or fear of retaliation by

their own government, of protecting their young, or active participants in their children’s persecution. In such cases, a parent’s opposition to a child’s need for protection cannot be the last word.

In contemplating this matter, we must uphold the important

principle that children are part of the human family and have an

independent right to protection from harm and the enjoyment of

fundamental rights. Where the wishes of a parent are at odds with

the child’s need for protection, those wishes may have to yield. The

Attorney General, and ultimately the courts, must ensure that

where there is conflict of interest, a child who needs protection will

receive it.

I would like to thank this Committee again for the opportunity

to present the views of the Lawyers Committee. We are grateful for

your attention to this matter, and look forward to continuing to

work with you. I would like to thank the Committee for your excellent and dedicated work to ensure that the United States will continue to serve as a beacon for the oppressed, whatever their homeland, and regardless of their age.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Shanfield appears in the appendix.]

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Shanfield.

I yield to the gentlewoman.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Shanfield, do you have that document with you?

Mr. SHANFIELD. I’m sorry. Which document are you referring to?

Ms. MCKINNEY. The one that you asked to be submitted to the

record.

Mr. SHANFIELD. Yes, I do.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Could you make it available?

Mr. SHANFIELD. Shall I bring it up?

Ms. MCKINNEY. Yes, please. Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. I want to thank our very distinguished panel for

their excellent testimony, and ask you a couple of questions and

then yield to my colleagues.

I understand, Mr. Garcia, you are under very tight time constraints. Ms. Fuentes spoke earlier about the farm schools or the

involuntary, forced labor that young people are required to underVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
42

go, as the time when children passed into state custody. Can you

speak to that issue?

I mean, many of us are very concerned in the United States, and

it is a global concern, about parental rights and state intrusion into

those parental rights. It would seem the face that Fidel Castro,

through the Elian Gonzalez case, has put on it is that somehow

parents are supreme, rather than subordinate to the state.

And frankly I was, as I stated earlier before we broke for those

votes, surprised by the Cuban Code of the Child, which we have

the Spanish version of and a number of the articles translated into

English. I would, without objection, ask that this be made a part

of the record. If you could speak to the issue of this indoctrination.

For example, if Elian were to go back, would he be forced to become

a Marxist?

Ms. FUENTES. Are you asking me, Mr. Chairman, or do you want

me to—— Mr. SMITH. Mr. Garcia has to leave, I understand. But then, Ms.

Fuentes, I would like to ask you that question as well.

Mr. GARCIA [speaking through an interpreter]. If Elian returns

to Cuba, he will be destined to live a life almost in captivity. In

other words, he will be obligated to comply. It is possible that the

slogan of the Pioneers might be changed. In the present it is ‘‘Pioneers for Communism, we vow to be like Che.’’ Maybe now the slogan will become ‘‘Pioneers for Communism, we vow to be like

Elian.’’ Elian will not see his old neighborhood again. Elian will be protected from the rest of the community in an exclusive neighborhood

in Miramar, in the Miramar neighborhood, a neighborhood in Havana that because of its strategic location is under constant surveillance by Cuban Intelligence. That is where Elian will live with his

father.

Ms. FUENTES. In other words, the press—the foreign press is

what he means, foreign press—will not have access to Elian ever

again, in his opinion.

Mr. GARCIA. Elian will be made a national—Elian’s father will be

made a national hero and maybe will be moved into a seat in the

National Assembly. Because, in my opinion, Elian’s father’s lack of

courage or perceived lack of courage has provided Castro with a

victory, a political victory against the United States. Which in the

ultimate analysis is what Castro is concerned about, is interested

in, a political victory, and not necessarily the welfare of Elian or

of any other Cuban child.

If Castro were concerned about the welfare and justice for children, he would have made sure that the 10 bodies, the children’s

bodies that are in the ocean from the ‘‘13th of March’’ tugboat capsizing, sinking, would have been properly rescued. If Castro were

interested in the welfare of children, he would have made sure that

a judicial process was started to bring to justice those responsible

for the massacre. However, the officers responsible for this mass

assassination walk the streets of Havana freely, with absolutely no

punishment.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Fuentes, you wanted to respond to that?

Ms. FUENTES. Both the Cuban family, the Children and Youth

Code of Cuba, the Constitution of Cuba, call for the obligatory forVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
43

mation and the responsibility of everyone involved with the upbringing of a child to work toward the formation, the shaping of the

Communist—and it says so, I don’t have it in front of me but it is

almost as if I were quoting it—the Communist formation of the

personality and of the individual. Anyone who comes in contact

with a child is obligated, whether it be parents, teachers, counselors, recreation coordinators, anyone who comes in contact with

that child’s educational process, socialization process, is obligated

under Cuban law to make of that child, be it a girl or a boy, a good

Communist.

So the answer to the question, ‘‘Will Elian be forced to be a good

Communist, or a Communist, if he is returned to Cuba,’’ the answer is, in violation of every single assured right of the individual,

according to the Declaration of Human Rights, yes, that child will

be forced to become a Communist.

It is just not me saying it. These are the legal instruments of the

society to which Elian will be returned. There are no options. Being

a Communist is not an option, being a Pioneer is not an option, in

a society where if a child or the parents of a child withhold his participation in the Pioneers organization, that child automatically is

stigmatized as someone coming from a family ideologically deviant,

and this is exactly the terminology that is used, ideological deviance.

Mr. SMITH. Dr. Dominguez, you mentioned that this would be

punishable under law. Can you tell us what would be meted out

to an individual, a young person or parents, who stood up to being

forced to become a Communist?

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. Well, initially it depends on the age of when

this will occur. Obviously, there are many things that could happen

to a child, one of them being the prevention of having the ability

to enroll in higher education, in choosing the career that he so desires, he or she so desires. So that would be the most obvious one,

if the child should elect to go into a higher education field.

It could be many other subtle ways. It could be harassing in

every which way that they could. They do it all the time to people

with dissenting opinions. And in fact under the Penal Code it is

also endorsed and envisioned. The Constitution itself calls for it.

Article 62 very clearly states that is punishable under the law. It

doesn’t go into the detail of what the punishment is under the Constitution, but they have a Penal Code and they have many other

ways of harassing and actually sanctioning the people who do not

agree with their system.

Mr. SMITH. Let me ask, Ms. Fuentes, you mentioned that the

state, when it puts out these rousing numbers, which are very

often repeated by UNICEF and others, that indicate that infant

mortality and child survival are relatively high for Cuba, and yet

in very few studies do I see a point that you made, namely that

they terminate potentially troublesome children, I think is the way

you put it.

We had a 1998 joint staff report by the Senate Foreign Relations

Committee and the House International Relations Committee,

which noted that the Cuban regime coerces abortions for so-called

‘‘social risk pregnancies.’’ According to the report, the ‘‘social risk

category’’ is extremely broad and encompasses women over 35, girls

44

under 20, women who have had three children, women from poor

or rural families, and women with genetically determined illnesses,

including things such as diabetes and hypertension.

You know, I have heard this argument for so long about how

great the medical care is in Cuba, but it ignores the rest of the picture. I mean, China can also show a very low infant mortality rate.

Several years ago they initiated a draconian eugenic policy where

handicapped children are singled out, girls, too, but handicapped

children are singled out and killed, so you don’t have handicapped

kids because they are being killed by abortion.

And now we see, and we have seen for some time now, the doctors in Cuba who bring this practice to light, and this is noted in

our Country Report on Human Rights Practices, are thrown into

jail, are beaten. So the whistleblowers find themselves persecuted

when they speak out for women who are being coerced and for children, and handicapped kids. Our country made a gargantuan step

in the right direction when we passed the Americans with Disabilities Act, which finally through law enfranchised handicapped individuals. Now, we see in Cuba, and we certainly see it in China as

well, the handicapped people are selectively left out of humanity.

If you could speak to that, because you did mention it in your

testimony.

Ms. FUENTES. Mr. Chairman, that, precisely that enforcement,

that forced coercion into abortion of anything that could spell trouble at the time of childbirth, is the reason why Dr. Ilda Molina—

who is Cuba’s and probably Latin America’s most prominent neurosurgeon, founder of the Institute for Neurological Studies in Cuba,

a member, by the way, a former member of the Cuban National Assembly, one of Fidel Castro’s pride and joy, a woman who is now

in her early forties, so we could say a product of the educational

system of the Revolution—that is precisely the reason why she resigned as a Congresswoman, as an assemblywoman, because the

connection between the coercion into abortion and the biomedical

production of placenta products, in other words, placentas from

those abortions as raw material, so to speak, I mean for lack of a

better term, for all kinds of pharmaceutical products and beauty

products, especially the cosmetic products, forced her to, I mean in

conscience, to resign her position.

And in resigning her position as an assemblywoman, as a member of the Cuban National Assembly, she was ousted from her position as director of the Institute of Neurological Studies, and not

only that, but she is in effect one of those adults who is virtually

kidnapped by the Cuban Government. The Cuban Government will

not allow her to leave the country, not even for a visit with her son

and grandchildren who live in Argentina, precisely because, according to the government, her medical information, her scientific

knowledge, is an issue of national security for Cuba.

So there is ample evidence. There are many doctors. The day

that the Committee decides or sees it fit, necessary to conduct some

hearings on the medical, on the real state of medicine in Cuba, and

the violations of human rights that are really rampant in the medical field, anyone could parade through here dozens and dozens and

dozens of doctors, of Cuban researchers and physicians who have

45

even served jail terms for, as you call it, whistle-blowing on these

abuses.

So there is ample evidence, with again reams of paper, with that.

If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would like to suggest that perhaps this

panel can introduce into the record at least the sections of the

Cuban Penal Code, of the Constitution, the Family and Children’s

Code, that are germane to what we have discussed here today, so

that the Committee and other Members of Congress can avail

themselves from the record.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Fuentes, without objection, we will do that, and

I think it is extremely important. This is the beginning of a learning curve. Many of us who thought that we knew something about

Cuba, have held hearings before. I actually tried to get into Cuba,

and was not allowed. But let me say that we will make every effort

to get the information that is coming out in this hearing and in

subsequent hearings out.

I mean, I find it outrageous that, in a poll-parroting way, people

will repeat these tremendous statistics and state—with all due respect, Reverend Walker—that they never saw anybody that was

sick in Cuba. Well, at least the newly borns and the young people

are being aborted.

Reverend Walker, I do have a question for you. You mentioned,

and you cited my favorite scripture, Matthew 25: ‘‘When I was hungry, you gave me to eat; thirsty, you gave me to drink,’’ and you

might recall our Lord said, ‘‘When I was in prison, you visited me.’’ You also talked about the need for reconciliation, which I couldn’t

agree more with, but part of my problem is, reconciliation without

justice is accommodation, it is not reconciliation.

And the concern that I have is, in Cuba you have a dictatorship

that continues—like those of Lenin, Nicolae Ceaucescu, Mao Tsetung, or even right now in China, Jiang Zemin—to commit violations each and every day. The Country Reports on Human Rights

Practices cites 350 to 400 political prisoners, men and women. Everybody at this table potentially could be thrown into prison if this

hearing were being held in Havana, every one. I would be, Cynthia

would be, all of us would run the risk, and certainly based on what

Ms. Fuentes and others have said, you would be going. You would

be getting a very long jail sentence for speaking so courageously on

behalf of the oppressed.

So reconciliation is important, but without justice, it is one-sided.

I mean, whether it be on El Salvador or South Africa, truth commissions talk about reconciliation, looking back; but they also demand that, going forward, that there be human rights observance.

Otherwise, it is a sham.

And, you know, I am not sure if you have read the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, but you should. I mean, do you

agree with its contents, where it says that the human rights record

is poor, that the regime systematically violates civil and political

rights of its citizens, the authorities harass, threaten, arbitrarily

arrest, detain, imprison, and defame human rights advocates and

members of independent professional associations, including journalists, economists, doctors and lawyers, often with the goal of coercing them into leaving the country? This is the State Department

speaking. They also point out that the government infringes on citiVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
46

zens’ privacy rights, denying freedom of speech, press, assembly

and association.

And my point is, do you agree with that assessment from the

State Department? And, second, again pursuant to Matthew 25,

have you yourself gone in and visited with these political prisoners

who have been subjected to torture and all kinds of horrific mistreatment?

Rev. WALKER. Mr. Chairman, since you have asked me about five

or six questions, it will take a little time to answer them all.

On the matter of reconciliation and, in your view, the necessity

to hold out as a precondition of some discussions toward understanding, mutual understanding and reconciliation, justice, is certainly not biblical in the sense that if we have a standard that is

our standard, and we indicate that I would not discuss with you

how we can reach understanding, how we can resolve our differences, unless you agree with my standard of justice, there is no

basis for communication.

Mr. SMITH. Could you yield on that one point, very briefly?

Rev. WALKER. Yes.

Mr. SMITH. The Cuban Government, Fidel Castro in particular,

has agreed to the myriad of human rights documents, starting with

the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and a host of other

documents. The problem has been no followup, no adherence to

those documents. And this isn’t just a U.S. Congressman or a U.S.

Government official speaking. I mean, the U.N. sent delegates

there some years ago. Those who came forward and spoke out were

retaliated against, so severe is the repression. So when you talk

reconciliation, he has got all the guns.

Rev. WALKER. Let me complete my statement, if you don’t mind.

What I am suggesting is that there must be mutual respect, and

there must be willingness to sit down and discuss together mutually—respecting the sovereignty, each side respecting the sovereignty of another—differences, charges, problems that exist. And

to my understanding, that has not happened.

I think, second, that your matter of visiting those in prison, yes,

I have, and I have talked with ex-prisoners, and I think it is important for you to know that I have been able to do some reconciling,

to be an intermediary in some cases. I think it is also important

for you to know that while we may not like it, or while the kind

of, I think to a large extent wishful thinking and this sort of psychological obsession with Fidel Castro which is reflected here, bars

our clarity, I think the fact is——

Mr. SMITH. With all due respect, you are suggesting that I am

psychologically unbalanced. But I have been reading from the State

Department’s very, very well considered and well documented

Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. The fact that there

is one man at the helm of that repression doesn’t make me or anyone else who singles him out obsessed—it is the same way that we

would single out Lenin or Stalin or anybody else who was at the

head of a repressive regime.

Rev. WALKER. My view, and it is consistent, although from a different perspective, with that which has been said by at least two

Members of the House, of the Committee is that we ought to be

careful about our language. Some of our language has suggested

47

that we are not focusing on this basic right of a parent to be with

his child. We are not basically talking about what is in the interest

of a child. We have politicized the issue, and there are those who

are attempting to make it an issue of what we think about Fidel

Castro, what we think about the Cuban Government.

My point is that to a certain extent those views are irrelevant.

Let me give you an example out of my own personal experience. I

am old enough that I grew up during the Depression. There were

those for whom my parents worked, who wanted to take me and

raise me. These were very well-heeled economically people, you

know, an officer in Exxon Corporation. My parents made the very

clear decision that they had the right and the responsibility to

raise their children. They were incensed that their rich friends for

whom they worked would even think that they would give up the

custody of their children.

We grew up in poverty. We grew up learning the values that I

talked about today, the values that have shaped me. I assure you

that there were many, many efforts in my own education to shape

my personality, to teach me to be a capitalist, to teach me to favor

free market enterprise, etcetera. That is the function of any government.

I think it would be irresponsible of the Cuban Government to

claim to be, as it does in its Constitution, a socialist state, and not

teach what that means to its people. We should not deny that to

Cuba. We should allow the parents, who may not have as much as

the distant relatives here in the United States would have, to raise

in this case his, his own child. That is the issue. The issue for me

is the welfare of this child in the custody of his father, not what

Fidel Castro thinks, not all of these issues which need to be addressed in due course and in proper context.

This was not what I was invited to discuss, and I think that we

have reached far beyond, in my view, the bounds of the specific description of the subject of this hearing. We are now engaging in a

certain degree of prophesy. For example, how can we sit here and

predict that young Elian will be forced to be a Marxist? I think this

is sort of outlandish and irresponsible. I think there are those who

think that, and they may speak their view. But to declare categorically, this is what is going to happen, I suggest is not responsible

discourse, and I feel that very seriously.

I know many people in Cuba who are not Marxists, who are critical of Marxism, at least some aspects of it, and who are patriotic

in their country, who are faithful in their family responsibilities,

who are good, upstanding, outstanding citizens. And I think that

we ought to recognize that people can be of a different ideological

or religious, political persuasion, and be quality human beings, can

be people of respect and people of integrity, and that we should be

able to——

Mr. SMITH. You have sparked some comments from the other

panelists, so——

Rev. WALKER [continuing]. And that we should be able to communicate with them and resolve any differences.

Mr. SMITH. Doctor.

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. I wanted to respond to that because it is in the

Cuban Constitution under Article 39, and I read it before and I

48

need to go back to it, because it is not me who is saying it. It is

their own Cuban Constitution.

Article 5 starts saying that the Communist Party of Cuba, described as Marxist-Leninist, is the organized vanguard of the

Cuban nation and is the superior leading force of the society and

the State organizes everything that goes on. And then in Article 39

it goes into how the State bases its educational and cultural policies on Marxist ideology, and it promotes the patriotic education

and Communist training for the new generations.

It is right there in the Cuban Constitution. It addresses that

very topic and that very issue.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. Fuentes, or Mr. Cohen?

Ms. FUENTES. I will translate for him, and then I would like to

make a comment, if I may.

Mr. COHEN [speaking through an interpreter]. It is very important to know that anyone who intends to study, who wants to study

in Cuba, for example to finish a university career, first has to have

a political file approved by the school or the educational institution.

In the case of my daughter, for instance, who was expelled from

school not because she was saying what she thought, speaking her

mind, but because of what her father thinks, and because in order

to free her, I tried to get a visa, automatically that disqualifies her

to continue her higher education.

I studied at the university. I graduated with a degree in mathematics. What does mathematics have to do with communism? During the 5 years I had to pass a subject matter titled ‘‘Scientific

Communism.’’ If you don’t pass that subject matter, you cannot become a mathematician or a physicist or an engineer—— Ms. TORRES. Or an artist.

Mr. COHEN [continuing]. Or Ms. Torres is adding on, an artist or

anything else.

Reverend Walker was saying before that he knows people in

Cuba who are not Communists. Probably that is what they tell

him, because that is how the political system works. I was a witness to how the system worked. The person that is addressing you

and telling you this is someone who was there and was a witness

of how this system works. That is why I am here. That is why I

broke with the government. One of the things that I hated most

was how honest people were utilized, people who lived in freedom

like the Reverend.

There were three categories in the Intelligence Service. One is to

be an agent. The agent is the one that is placed outside in a foreign

country and provides information to Cuba about the activities in

that country.

The second person, the second level is a confidence person, but

for that there is a category that is referred to as a worthwhile contact. Those are people who come to Cuba. They are studied, they

are actually studied, and they get them to collaborate in some way

with the government, but they have no secret information. They

simply become like spokespersons of the government. The worthwhile contact people know that they are, in effect, providing a service to the Cuban Government.

There is a third category, which is the friendly relation, the

friendly contact. This person never knows that he is, in effect,

49

working for the government. They are used without their knowledge, really. They are used. They show them the apparent successes of the Revolution. They are taken to hospitals, they are

taken to biotechnology centers. Anybody would be impressed, because you never really get to know the other truth.

That person gets a file opened. A file is opened for that person

in Cuba. If tomorrow any one of you goes to Cuba, you will have

a file opened. It doesn’t matter who you are. Every single person

that goes to Cuba has a file. You can’t possibly know that reality,

but I am a witness of that reality.

This is a time-consuming activity, but it is done with plenty of

time. The person is studied, their motivations, their weaknesses,

their resentments, if they are black, if they are white, and the system grinds that information into usable information. I am a witness to that, which is why I broke with the regime, because there

are a lot of honest people, illustrious people who are very good people, who live in a world of disinformation, and that Castro actually

mocks them. Believe me, that is the truth, and I am a witness of

that. Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. I would like to yield to Cynthia McKinney, and if

time permits, we would like to have a second round of questions,

but if anybody does have to leave, I certainly understand it. It is

getting very late.

Ms. McKinney.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to, I guess,

thank you for calling this hearing, because I have to say that it has

been educational for me as well, and I believe that in due course

we will have more hearings and we will explore the issue of Cuba

even more.

I do want to hear from Mr. Cohen a little more, but I want to

yield to my colleague so that she can go ahead of me.

Ms. LEE. Thank you, and I would like to thank my colleague for

yielding, and also would like to thank the Chair for allowing me

to sit in on this Subcommittee hearing. I serve on the International

Relations Committee Subcommittee on Africa, but this is an issue

that is very important to me. Human rights of children anywhere

in the world are critical in terms of just the future of the world.

Oftentimes when I travel, and now I am not talking about to

Cuba but I am talking about throughout the world, I am asked as

an African American with regard to what is going on with our children here in America in terms of the millions of children living in

poverty, in terms of the millions of children who are homeless, and

the disproportionate number of young African American men in jail

for nonviolent offenses. So other countries and other leaders in

countries ask me very similar questions that we are asking today,

and so human rights, of course, for children anywhere in the world

are very important.

Let me say that I have visited Cuba on several occasions. I wanted to form my own opinions about the realities of Cuba. Unfortunately, this 40-year embargo has prevented American citizens from

freely traveling, to be able to see and to form their own opinions.

We have a right to travel, and we have not been able as American

citizens to have that right to travel to Cuba for a variety of reasons, unless we jump through a lot of hoops.

50

So I go so I can come back and try to engage in objective discussion with regard to United States-Cuba policy. And I think this

dialogue must take place, so I am pleased that this hearing is taking place today, because this gets us at least to the dialogue stage.

Now, it is no secret—and one of the reasons I came over here,

Mr. Chairman, is I was sitting in my office watching the videotape

of Elian, and I said I am going to have to come over to this hearing

because I don’t know what to do. Quite frankly, I have to make this

statement.

It is no secret that I have supported the return of Elian to his

father. I think that that is the only right thing to do, that parental

custody, the bond between a parent and child, supersedes any kind

of issue with regard to any government in the world. And so I had

the opportunity to visit Mr. Gonzalez in Cuba and here in Maryland, and I have no reason to believe that he is not a fit parent.

He loves his child, and he should be returned.

Today when I saw this videotape, and I wanted to ask members

of the panel what they thought about this, because to me this videotape has crossed the line, Mr. Chairman. This videotape, when

I saw young Elian on this tape, it reminded me of oftentimes when

we see members of our armed services and U.S. citizens captured

abroad and then put on television and asked to say questions, and

then the tapes are put out to the media. We as Americans feel incensed that that kind of propaganda can go out, and here we have

a 6-year-old child who was on television earlier. It just brought

back memories of times when we have to deal with this as American people.

I wanted to see if the panel, any of you felt that that crossed the

line at all in terms of Elian Gonzalez and his human rights, or if

that is something that we think is the right thing to do to convince

the American people that he should stay in America? I am curious

about that.

Mr. SMITH. First of all, let me respond, since you are asking the

panel, the witnesses. I happen to believe that this is unlike the

POWs. As a matter of fact, I was on the POW–MIA Task Force for

Vietnam, and made trips over there, and I remember going through

the footage. We were originally talking about live sightings and

then unfortunately it became just a matter of trying to repatriate

remains.

But in looking at all of those old clippings, there were men under

duress, who were tortured day in and day out. Witness Jeremiah

Denton, Sam Johnson, both of whom have written books, and

many, many others who were being coerced and tortured if they

didn’t say exactly what they were told to say—matter of fact, Jeremiah Denton, while he was giving his testimony, false, about how

great things were, was actually blinking ‘‘torture’’ in Morse code.

He had the presence of mind to do that during that horrific ordeal.

I have met many, many people who have lived in captivity, such

as Armando Valladares, one of the greatest leaders of democracy,

who was actually Reagan’s Ambassador to Geneva, the Geneva

Convention on Human Rights. I have read his book, ‘‘Against All

Hope,’’ and then talked to him extensively about the torture that

he had to endure, day in and day out, in Castro’s prisons. That

may be putting a name on it. They are Castro’s prisons, like it or

51

not, just like they were Stalin’s gulags, and then they became

Khrushchev’s and other people’s in the former Soviet Union.

Here we have a young child who has bonded very closely to a

young lady, and I have met with this young lady, the cousin. I have

met with other members of the family. He seems to love her and

has substituted the love that he loved so deeply for his own mother, for this other caregiver, this surrogate mother, call her whatever you would like, Marisleysis. And you have a situation where

the family deeply loves this child, and they put out a video. I don’t

think that crosses the line.

And to make the comparison to men in combat or any other prison-like situation where they have been tortured, goes over the line,

I say with all due respect to my friend. Because I watched that

video this morning, and it comported with everything else that has

been said. I happen to argue, and I argued again this morning

when we opened up this hearing, I would hope that a court of competence would look at the best interests of the child.

And we have seen, while Reverend Walker would disagree that

we can’t have prophetic views whether or not he will become a

Marxist, you know, past is prologue. The clear, unmistakable

record of the Communist dictatorship in Cuba, and there are supporting documents, witnesses to that repression, year in and year

out, have come forward to assert that in that system of education

there will be a very aggressive attempt to mold this individual in

a Marxist-Leninist perspective. That is just based on all of the documentation.

Ms. LEE. Would the Chairman yield?

Mr. SMITH. Let me just conclude. So I happen to think that,

whether it was right or wrong, that was up to the family, but it

certainly, absolutely does not compare in any way to men who have

been coerced under pain of being kicked when they return to their

jail cells in Vietnam, or in Iraq when our fliers were paraded by

Saddam Hussein, absolutely not.

Ms. LEE. Would the Chairman yield?

Mr. SMITH. I will be happy to yield.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Chairman, no, I think you made the point. What

my point is, is given what you just said, is this an appropriate

mechanism or tactic to use——

Mr. SMITH. Well, as I said, I think it is appropriate, and I thank

the gentlelady for yielding. I also know the Cuban Government was

very outraged when a major network personality interviewed Elian.

What is being left out of this, in my view, is best interests of the

child. We will shortly vote on The Hague Convention on Adoption,

and peppered throughout that document is that phrase, ‘‘best interests of the child.’’ And maybe it is to return with his father. I would

hope that his father, if given the opportunity, could make a case

for staying here.

But we are talking about a situation where we have not heard

at all. I am learning things myself today, and I have been following

Cuba for years, about this code that is forced upon young children.

Now, we would never settle for that. And I think the more time we

have as this goes forward, I will make a major case on the floor

about this robbing of parents of their rights, including Elian’s dad.

52

You know, when his child, Elian, goes, if he does go back to

Cuba, when he is now handed off for the final molding by the government, where are we going to be? You know, we will have lost

that child. Maybe he will come back. Maybe he will resist it. People

do resist it. But he will be molded. And I think we have got to

think of his future. That is not prophetic. That is based on all of

the available evidence that reasonable men and women can possibly have.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Mr. Chairman? Mr. Chairman, would you just

yield?

Mr. SMITH. Yes.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Is it not the case that Elian is being molded

now? I have got a report here that says that he fell in love with

chocolate milk, and when his relatives give him chocolate milk,

they tell him Fidel Castro won’t let his grandma make that for him

in Cuba. Is he not being molded now? And could that have some

bearing on—— Mr. SMITH. Let me just say, since—— Ms. MCKINNEY [continuing]. The content of that video? I have

not seen the videotape, so I don’t know it, but it certainly appears

to me that there is some molding going on right here.

Mr. SMITH. Yes, Mr. Diaz-Balart.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. I know we have a vote, and I want to first

thank you, Mr. Chairman, again for this opportunity, and I just

want to make sure that I have this opportunity to thank all the

panel. Ileana, I know you are leaving, thank you. Thank you.

And I have felt very proud of all the Cuban and Cuban-American

members of the panel, and you, sir, from the Lawyers Committee,

for standing up for children’s rights. Children have rights. They

have a right to seek political asylum, and it is in the regs, and I

have read the regs. Any alien means any person, including a child,

and I am glad that you all picked up on that.

I just want to say this. I have had a chance to meet Elian. Elian

is a human being, and he is a brilliant 6-year-old. The fact that

people may be bothered because he likes freedom, he likes to be in

the United States and he doesn’t like to go back to oppression, is

no excuse for saying that he is not speaking the truth when he tells

Sister Jean, changes her mind; when he tells Diane Sawyer,

changes her mind; when he tells a psychiatrist that Diane Sawyer

brought, changes his mind; and now he tells the world—I haven’t

seen that video—but everybody who talks to him, he knows apparently, since this administration is not following its own precedents

and procedure, that he has got to act as his own lawyer, and that

is the sad case.

That is the reality of Elian Gonzalez. So he doesn’t want to go

back to oppression. He is 6 years old, and he is convinced of that.

And I remember when I was 6 years old, I knew what was going

on in Cuba, and I wouldn’t have wanted to go back to oppression

when I was 6 years old.

And I just want to ask one question of Mr. Cohen, if I may, if

I can ask you a question.

Ms. FUENTES. I have got to go.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Do you really believe, do you believe that after

Elian fades as a human interest story, do you think that Castro

53

will take the risk of letting Elian and his father exist? (Repeated

in Spanish.)

Mr. COHEN. Never. (Remarks in Spanish.)

Rev. WALKER. May we have a translation? Somebody?

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. I could do it.

Mr. COHEN. You better, because I don’t want to make any mistake in this.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Dr. Dominguez will translate.

Mr. COHEN. Who, you?

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. I will.

Mr. COHEN. OK. Anybody. [Speaking through an interpreter.]

Here is the reality. Where is Rowina? Where is Aldana?

[Ms. Fuentes resumes as the interpreter.] The answer is no. We

know how the system works. And if you want to know what has

happened in the past, don’t look at this humble family. You can

look at the example of the best and most prominent government officials. The most recent one is Rowina, who was the Foreign Minister, a public figure who had traveled the entire world, with contacts in every foreign office in the world. The question is, has anyone seen Rowina again? Has any journalist, has any foreign journalist been able to interview Mr. Rowina again? Where is Mr.

Rowina?

But before Rowina there was Mr. Aldana, and all the previous

VIPs that Fidel has vanished. So you are really able to answer this

question on your own. Would Castro allow this child, in another 2

years, or the grandmothers, or his father, to stand before the foreign press and say, ‘‘Well, perhaps we made a mistake.’’ Things are

already happening. Elian’s father can’t even get together with his

own family. The grandmothers were not allowed to meet with their

own family. And if I wanted to go to Bethesda now and speak to

Elian’s father, to ask him to intercede for my own family, you could

witness if you came with me that I would not be allowed to do that

either, because it is a risk that Fidel Castro will not take. Thank

you.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART [presiding]. I fully agree with you, and I think

that anyone who understands the reality of Cuba would agree with

you, and that is why it is so monstrous to see that they are turning

this child back to what is inevitably, inevitably a situation where,

after he ceases to be a human interest story, after he can perhaps

be visited at that mansion that Mr. Garcia talked about before,

that he will probably be placed in, after that passes, Castro will

simply not take the risk that 2 years from now or 3 years from

now, any member of that family can show up and say things were

different to as they were being portrayed by Castro and the Clinton

administration. So that shows how monstrous that situation is.

I want to also thank, in addition to all the panelists, Neri

Torres——

Ms. TORRES. Thank you.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART [continuing]. For pointing out the truth about

Cuba. The history of your family, by the way, people of color in the

history of Cuba have had a disproportionate, had a disproportionate, extraordinarily disproportionate role in the liberation of

Cuba.

54

Ms. TORRES. Cuba is always being outstanding, we are in the

right to be part of the country, and——

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Not only that, not only the right to be part of

the——

Ms. TORRES [continuing]. Of everything that happens in the

country.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART [continuing]. But that, as I said before, the

great source of strength that Castro had from the beginning was

racism. He was always viewed as——

Ms. TORRES. The opponent of Batista, who was a colored man.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. And remember that there was the phrase

(Spanish phrase). That is just an aside.

Ms. TORRES. Well, they wanted the devil to come, and they have

it.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. But what is interesting, what is interesting,

how interesting it is that——

Ms. TORRES. Well, let me tell you something——

Mr. DIAZ-BALART [continuing]. In the context, in the context of

Cuban history——

Rev. WALKER. Do we deserve a translation or not? Please.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. What language am I speaking in?

Rev. WALKER. Can someone translate? You spoke Spanish which

was not translated.

Ms. FUENTES. (Spanish phrase) Meaning, that was the popular

word out, let the black——

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. The rich bourgeoisie——

Ms. FUENTES. For the rich class, mostly, ‘‘Let the black man get

out of power,’’ Batista, who was a black, a mulatto, ‘‘Let the black

man go, even if what comes after is chaos.’’ And that is very true.

Ms. TORRES. Can I point out something? During Castro, we always live in fear, that they tell us not to go to America, ‘‘No, don’t

travel to America because the KKK is going to take you, the dogs

are there, black is treated like hell,’’ and it has always been a very

hard issue for black people to leave Cuba.

First of all, it was the economical lack of power for Cubans, because first in the 1950’s who left the country were the white people

who were in power, because they were the rich people. Then the

black people had to stay, and when finally we decided to leave, it

was too late and people were feared that there was something happening here with the black people. So it wasn’t until the 1980’s

that black people took conscious that we were able to leave too, because we had even the right to be against the government too. I

mean, it is not that we have to bow to everything that happens in

the country.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Chairman, I have to leave. I want to again

thank you, Neri, thank all of the panelists. I know Mr. Walker is

leaving. I wanted to ask you one question. You said you visited political prisoners. Can you give us some names?

Rev. WALKER. I have an appointment and I am running late, but

I would be glad to talk to you anytime.

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Well, if you could just provide some names of

political prisoners you visited, it would be very enlightening.

I think his exit is most enlightening, at this point.

55

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for pointing out so

many of the unfortunate realities of today’s Cuba and what would

face Elian if the Clinton administration gets its way. Thank you.

Mr. SMITH [presiding]. Thank you, Mr. Diaz-Balart.

Let me ask Mr. Cohen, I understand that you went to the National Council of Churches to ask that they intervene on your family’s behalf. Can you tell us about this?

Mr. COHEN [speaking through an interpreter]. My family has

gone to all the government agencies and departments, including all

the religious institutions in Cuba, all the religious denominations,

and among the groups that my family went to visit was the National Council of Churches chapter in Cuba.

I personally sent a fax letter to Ms. Campbell, to Reverend

Campbell. My family also sent the information directly to the National Council of Churches office in Havana, in Cuba. I have yet

to receive an answer from the U.S. office of the National Council

of Churches. My wife was called in Cuba, was called to Oto

Marachal’s office, from the National Council of Churches in Cuba,

but basically the message was, ‘‘We can only do what Fidel Castro

allows us to do.’’

That is exactly what happened with the Jewish community. I am

of Jewish origin. My family approached Dr. Jose Miller, who is the

president of the Jewish Congregation in Cuba, who made—he participated in one of those open forums in favor of the return of Elian

to Cuba. Miller hasn’t even called my family. What we have realized is that all these institutions in Cuba can only do what Fidel

Castro allows them to do.

That is the sad reality of my family. Thank you.

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Cohen.

I would like to yield to our chief counsel and staff director, Grover Joseph Rees.

Mr. REES. Mr. Shanfield, I take it from the Lawyers Committee

testimony that you do recognize that where there is an apparent

conflict or the possibility of a conflict, that the child’s interest isn’t

exactly the same as the parent’s, then some other person should be

allowed to file an asylum application for the child and there should

be some kind of a proceeding to determine whether it is appropriate for that to go forward.

Now, what do you say to the argument that has been made here

earlier, that if you allow somebody other than the parent—where

there is a parent living, even if that parent is in the country that

it is alleged will cause the persecution of the child—that if you

allow other people to file asylum applications, every child who happens to be in the United States, the child of an ambassador from

a terrible country, or rather a country with a terrible government,

or some visitor, that we would simply have lots and lots of children

in this situation who would not ever be able to be with their parents after that? How would you limit this in order to make sure

that wasn’t what was going on?

Mr. SHANFIELD. Well, what is at stake here is that every child

should have access to a fair adjudication of an asylum claim; that

any child, with support or without support, has an opportunity to

receive protection from the United States.

56

It is difficult to speak to the specifics of this circumstance, but

what has happened in this case seems to run contrary to permitting access to children. What we have at stake here is a decision

by the Attorney General, supported by the District Court, where

the Attorney General has been basically granted unfettered discretion to determine what ‘‘any alien’’ means. If the Attorney General

can say that Elian Gonzalez does not fall under the rubric of ‘‘any

alien,’’ I am uncomfortable about what is going to happen to future

children where there may be conflict between that child, a parent

or a guardian.

Mr. SMITH. Ms. McKinney.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Sure. I don’t know, Mr. Chairman, if you asked

the question about whether the U.S. Government had helped Mr.

Cohen with his particular situation, so why don’t we start off with

that?

Ms. FUENTES. Is that your question?

Ms. MCKINNEY. Yes.

Mr. COHEN [speaking through an interpreter]. I met personally

with Charles Shapiro with the State Department. He saw me in his

office. He explained to me that he had full knowledge of my situation, of my case. He said that every 6 months they give a report,

a 6-month report to the Cuban Government, asking for reparation

on the violation of the treaty and presenting cases where the treaties are being violated. But the Cuban Government, according to

Mr. Shapiro, the Cuban Government has never given him an answer, given the State Department an answer.

I know that Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen and Congressman

Lincoln Diaz-Balart have also done their bit on my behalf, and I

also think Congressman Serrano has taken up my case, who did

not know of my case until about 2 weeks ago. He learned about my

case in a television program where he was a speaker, a guest

speaker with Oliver North. Michele from his office was here with

us just now, and she said to me that they wanted to show me what

Congressman Serrano’s office was doing for the case. I truly believe

that someone like Congressman Serrano or someone like Reverend

Lucius Walker, because of a more friendly relationship with Castro,

if they interceded my family would probably be released immediately, and I hope that this happens. Thank you.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Could you talk to me a little bit about what your

responsibilities were with the Intelligence Service?

Mr. COHEN. In Cuba?

Ms. MCKINNEY. Yes.

Mr. COHEN. OK. [Speaking through an interpreter.] I specifically

worked taking care of, in other words, giving personal attention to

foreign investment in Cuba. I worked for a department the M–6

Department, whose charge, whose mandate was to study, to do a

profile on any foreign, potential foreign investor from any foreign

country who were coming to, you know, explore investing.

I also worked for a time, a while, in other departments. In one

of those departments, I worked in another department whose objective was to, in effect, steal technological information from the

United States For example, there was a case where there was

someone, the case of a microprocessor, the technology of that that

the Cuban Government wanted to have, even though this techVerDate 11-MAY-2000 10:43 Feb 15, 2001 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\DONEBY~1\68020.TXT HINTREL1 PsN: HINTREL1
57

nology cannot be used in Cuba because there is just no way of

using it. But the Cuban Government would then send that information, release that information to governments like the Iraqi Government, sometimes like China.

That is why sometimes I say to friends, people that I know, that

I am friends with in this country, that Fidel Castro is not just the

enemy of the Cuban family or of the Cuban people. He is an enemy

of all of us, yourself included, yourselves included.

But in order for me to explain this, a lot of people say to me I

am betraying Fidel Castro. And my answer is, Fidel Castro has betrayed the Cuban people. And the people I don’t want to betray are

my people, is my people, because I was forced, I had no choice, really. That is my reality, and I am branded by that past. That is a

result of having had no choice, up to a point.

Ms. MCKINNEY. You mentioned that the Cuban Government

keeps a file—— Mr. COHEN. The Cuban Government?

Ms. MCKINNEY [continuing]. Yes, keeps a file on people who travel there. And we have recently learned that the U.S. Government

itself might be keeping files, as well, similar kinds of files. Recent

revelations about a particular program of the National Security

Agency called ‘‘Echelon’’ that monitors all telephone calls, all emails, all faxes, all communication that I would conduct with my

colleague, any communication that I would conduct with friends

that I have abroad, it is my understanding, and we are just finding

this out, that all of that communication has the potential of being

intercepted by the U.S. Government.

Now, when I went to China, I was told that one of the bad things

about China was that they listen to the e-mails and the communications of people in China, and so I am a bit shocked to discover

that my own government does the same thing. But I shouldn’t be

very much surprised because my father’s name was mentioned as

one who was under surveillance by the government, whatever, local

or Federal Government, because of his civil rights activities in this

country.

So I don’t know that—I guess the point I am trying to make is

that perhaps, maybe it is just the nature of government, period,

that our private, innermost thoughts are intercepted or can be

intercepted by people that we trust.

Ms. FUENTES. He says first of all he doesn’t really know the extent to which things are operant in this country.

Mr. COHEN [speaking through an interpreter]. But I want to say

that there is a great difference, and I will explain. If there are files

that the U.S. Government has available or has opened, it is because the United States is protecting its own Nation, its own interests. The President of the United States is democratically elected,

and I feel that all the strength of government and all the efforts

are rightfully praised in preserving the security and the survival

of this country, of this system, of this Nation.

The difference that I see when comparing it to Cuba, that in

Cuba the only interests that are being advocated for or defended

are the interests of one person, of one ego, not the interests of the

whole nation. The interests of the people are really not the ones

that are being advocated.

58

And the saddest thing I see is that in Cuba someone like you

could not possibly say what you have just said in a country where

there is freedom. No one can go up to the National Congress, the

National Assembly, with a different idea or with a criticism of some

sort.

Which is why I respect this country and I admire it, because I

am a witness. I have seen that freedom, those rights, but that freedom that we enjoy here, that the society enjoys, is unfortunately

used by the Cuban Government, by governments like the Cuban

Government. I truly, from the bottom of my heart, respect your

points of view, and I have a lot of things to learn from a person

like you.

But you have a photograph of Elian on your lapel, and you are

advocating for his return to Cuba. That is freedom. But to think

that in Cuba anybody could have a photograph on their lapel of my

family, do you really think that anyone in Cuba can say on the

street that they are in favor of the reunification of this family? This

is what I think makes up the difference, and every day I thank God

for allowing me to see all this and be here. Thank you.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you.

I would just like to remind the Chairman that we do have victims of our own government, U.S. Government excesses in the

COINTEL program, the counterintelligence program, where African American and minority leaders were targeted and in some

cases eliminated because of their advocacy for freedom for black

people and minorities in this country.

I have other information that I would like to submit for the

record, Mr. Chairman. I have got a letter from Congressman Ney

and some information from Congressman Ciro Rodriguez, who

would like to have their information entered into the record.

Mr. SMITH. Without objection, those additions will be made a

part of the record.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Finally, Mr. Chairman, if I can be indulged just

two questions more, one on Amnesty International reports that, of

27,000 people interviewed, they only found 10 who had claims of

political persecution. Do the panelists think that this is reflective

of the reason why people leave Cuba?

Mr. COHEN [speaking through an interpreter]. Twenty-seven

thousand Cubans, interviewed by Amnesty International—— Ms. MCKINNEY. Yes.

Mr. COHEN [continuing]. In Cuba?

Ms. MCKINNEY. No. These are people who had left, and I believe

that, yes, they were in Guantanamo Bay, I believe. I can find out.

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. Ms. McKinney, I would like to answer that,

please. Actually, I was very involved in Guantanamo, and I can answer that.

One of the reasons that perhaps Amnesty International was not

able to find as many people interested in applying for asylum is because we do have the Cuban Adjustment Act, and many people

would not—the asylum process is very difficult. It is hardly understood by people who come in from systems that are repressive.

They do not understand what the procedure is all about.

I do conduct a class on a weekly basis to people who are seeking

asylum, because I think it is our duty to inform them about the

59

procedure. It is very difficult to understand, and I am talking about

Chinese, I am talking about Haitians, I am talking about Colombians, I am talking about Cubans. And I find that it is my duty

to explain the process because many people might have a case, and

yet they are not able to elaborate or to explain it to the satisfaction

of the asylum officer, and that could have happened to anyone who

might not have been able to hear it explain, the procedure beforehand.

One of the things that we are finding now in Cuba is that unfortunately we have the in-country refugee processing program, and

unlike many other countries, Cuba does not allow NGO’s or a ‘‘VOLAG,’’ (what we call a ‘‘VOLAG’’)to go in and act as a mediator

or as a facilitator between the United States Government officer

and the Cuban Government. And that is why a lot of people who

then reach the U.S. Interest Section cannot qualify, because they

do not know.

I do have now a program that gets aired to Cuba every Wednesday, where I explain precisely the immigration rules and regulations, because we do want to actually encourage the orderly process

in immigration, under immigration laws. And I don’t think that the

interviews are really reflective, in answer to your question. I think

this just basically reflects the overall response of anyone who

comes out of the country and they don’t know what to say because

they don’t know what is important.

Besides, they are in fact very fearful when you have an officer

interviewing them, and Amnesty International people might have

come across as maybe people who might have been representing a

government agenda. And that, it happens to me too. I always have

to clarify, I do not represent the government. I have to first establish myself as an NGO before they can even confide in me. It is

very difficult.

And again I wanted to touch also on a point that somebody asked

about Mr. Cohen’s situation. I think he is not unique. There are

many, many things that happen to people who actually ask for asylum here in the United States. They are granted asylum, and yet

their family members are really sanctioned in Cuba. The United

States Government does not disclose this information but yet, because of the procedural processes that exist there, because of the

in-country refugee processing program, the Government of Cuba

does punish the family members and they do retaliate by avoiding

or denying the exit visas to those people.

And I would suggest something else to this Subcommittee. There

are migration talks every 6 months between Cuba and the State

Department and INS. It would be very interesting and very useful

for many of you to actually try to find out what goes on during

those migration talks. There are certain, I am sure, understandings

and agreements that might even be impacting the situation that

we have today.

I can tell you that from my experience, people in his [Mr.

Cohen’s] situation, this has been going on forever. I mean, this is

not new. We have a long list of cases. The United States has

stepped in many times to try to resolve this issue. We haven’t yet

come to any, you know, conclusive solution to this. But I just wanted to let you know that this has been going on for a while.

60

Mr. SMITH. Would my friend from Georgia yield to Joseph Rees?

Ms. MCKINNEY. Sure.

Mr. SMITH. Joseph Rees used to be the general counsel of the

INS before becoming chief counsel and staff director of the International Operations and Human Rights Subcommittee.

Mr. REES. I just wanted to comment that that statistic, 10 out

of 27,000, I assume that you knew that that wasn’t that Amnesty

thought there were only 10 legitimate refugees out of 27,000. That

was the number that INS found out of 27,000 people who managed

to escape on rafts and were picked up on the high seas.

And that statistic is eerily reminiscent of the number of Haitians

that we found when we were doing that for about 10 years between

1981 and 1991. Out of 22,000 people interviewed, we only found 11

people who were deemed to be refugees. Well, once we started

doing it right in 1991, we found 30 percent to at least have a credible case of being refugees.

So a lot of it just depends on how close a look you take, and I

think the Chairman will probably take Professor Dominguez up on

the suggestion that we need to take a closer look both at the incountry refugee processing, at the interviews for the people who

come on rafts, and at what impact those migration talks have.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Thank you. My final question would be about

U.S. policy to overthrow Castro. There have been assassination attempts and other kinds of biological terrorism that has been used,

invasion on at least one occasion, to try and overthrow Castro, and

nothing has worked. Why?

Mr. COHEN [speaking through a translator]. My personal opinion,

so many of these things happened long before I was born, that I

don’t think there really was a serious attempt on the part of this

country to kill Fidel Castro. This is my personal opinion. Why do

I feel this way? I also do not have evidence, and I don’t think any

of us here have evidence of everything that Fidel Castro says or

claims that has been done as attempts on his life. I think there is

a CIA document to the effect, that addresses this issue, but I personally don’t think that there was ever a serious, a real serious,

concerted attempt.

Neither would I want to advocate in favor or to opine in favor

of such attempts. What I can say to you, the demoralization, the

breakdown of authority, of degradation, of humiliation, of lost values of the Cuban intelligence system or the counterintelligence system would not allow—no, ‘‘allow’’ is not the word—would not withstand a real serious attempt.

In other words, a few months ago a member of Castro’s personal

bodyguard defected. His name was Lazaro Betancourt, more or less

my age, whose family is in Cuba, of course as a hostage. And I told

him, ‘‘Are you the only one who feels this way?’’ ‘‘No, I’m the only

one who dared to defect, because not everyone is willing to have

their family be retained as a hostage and be harassed.’’

Truly, and Castro knows this, all of that, all of this system, this

entire thing will end with his life. When his life ends, all of this

will come to an end. Not that we are betting on this or that you

are betting on it, or that we are projecting or prophesying or anything like that. Cuba will be free.

61

And he knows, Castro knows, that no one is going to really attempt to end his life, not in Cuba, because there are no conditions

that would enable such an attempt, because there is over a 2,000-

man security force around him, with 33,000 men, and you can’t get

weapons in Cuba freely. So whatever attempts might have occurred

in the past, I don’t really think they were motivated truly or seriously, and of course for Castro that becomes, he turns it into some

sort of victory. Thank you.

Ms. MCKINNEY. Mr. Chairman, I would like to put additional information into the record about those assassination attempts.

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Cohen, thank you. I just have one final question,

and I think, Mr. Cohen, you might be the right one to direct it to.

When the grandmothers came to the United States and met with

Sister Jean and Elian, there were reports that Cuba’s or Castro’s

agents accompanied them. Is that the same today? Is that true, in

your opinion?

And, second, Mr. Gonzalez, who is obviously here in the United

States right now, are agents also accompanying him, both in-country or people who have come with him? And, in your view, and I

know this is speculation—but is he operating on a script? I mean,

if he steps off and says something out of balance, is there a possibility of retaliation?

Mr. COHEN [speaking through a translator]. The first public appearance that Mr. Gonzalez made was to look for the—to show the

video—oh, there is a video of that presentation, of that first public

appearance. The person immediately to his right, is Felix Wilson.

He is an officer of the B–1 Intelligence Department. M–1, I’m sorry, ‘‘M’’ as in Mary, 1. He knows me; I know him.

The M–1 Department, their task, their mandate is to operate, to

guide operations against the United States. There are various departments, sub-departments within that department. There is Department M–1, Section 1. That is where Felix Wilson works, and

his task, his responsibilities are emphatically, in other words, on

the U.S. Government. That is his task.

The target of this gentleman is the United States, so his task is

to develop relationships with, for example, university professors,

with scholars, to do a review, to do a profile on them, to inform,

to try to influence lobbying in Congress, with a structured methodology that takes 75 percent of propaganda, or in other words, untruth, and 25 percent of truth. And this, according to Mr. Cohen,

is a methodology of preparing information.

Elian’s father is here, and he has to answer, he has to act according to that libretto, to that script. He cannot speak freely, he cannot speak openly, and he cannot contact his family here, his American family. And the reason why he cannot contact the family, he

will discover the actual truth of what his potential life could be in

this country. In other words, he will have access to information

that is withheld from him by the Cuban Government.

That doesn’t mean that if he contacts his family, he will automatically make a decision to stay in the United States, because the

grandmothers are there, in other words, his mother. There is a lot

of family pressures and people left behind. But he will discover an

alternative reality, the reality that we have here, and that is a

great risk for Fidel Castro’s balanced scheme.

62

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much for that answer and for the insight it provides us. I would like to thank our very distinguished

witnesses. If they have anything further they would like to convey

to the Subcommittee?

On behalf of my Ranking Member, Ms. McKinney from Georgia,

the other Members of the Committee, we thank you so very much.

We will be getting back to you probably with some additional questions, and this will be the first in a series of hearings, so I look

forward to building on this record and as widely as possible disseminating the information. So we do thank you so very much.

Mr. COHEN. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Ms. DOMINGUEZ. Thank you.

Ms. FUENTES. Thank you.

[Whereupon, at 6:40 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

(63)

A P P E N D I X

APRIL 13, 2000

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

112

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151