Month: June 2022

From college dorm posters of the murderous Che Guevara to the fawning comments of American leftists, Cuba has long been the darling of Progressives. The truth is rather ugly, however.  We present the State Department analysis of human rights in the island nation.

Cuba is an authoritarian state. The 2019 constitution codifies that Cuba remains a one-party system in which the Communist Party is the only legal political party. On April 19, President Miguel Diaz-Canel replaced former president Raul Castro as first secretary of the Communist Party, the highest political entity of the state by law. Elections were neither free nor fair nor competitive.

The Ministry of Interior controls police, internal security forces, and the prison system. The ministry’s National Revolutionary Police are the primary law enforcement organization. Specialized units of the ministry’s state security branch are responsible for monitoring, infiltrating, and suppressing independent political activity. The national leadership, including members of the military, maintained effective control over the security forces. There were credible reports that members of the security forces committed numerous abuses, and the number of political prisoners increased dramatically, with many held in pretrial detention under extremely harsh and degrading conditions.

On January 28, security forces violently arrested more than 20 artists and journalist peacefully protesting in front of the Ministry of Culture for the release of detained artists. On July 11, spontaneous peaceful protests broke out across the island. In the largest and most widespread demonstrations in decades, tens of thousands of citizens across the country poured into the streets to demand an end to repression as well as to criticize the government’s failure to meet their basic needs and its poor response to COVID-19. Social media posts helped spread news of the protests among citizens. Security forces responded with tear gas, beatings, and arrests. First Secretary of the Communist Party and President Miguel Diaz-Canel went on national television to call on “all revolutionaries and communists to confront these protests,” a reference to Article Four of the 2019 constitution, which gives citizens the right to “combat through any means, including armed combat” any who “intend to topple the political, social, and economic order established by this constitution.” Many of those arrested reported cruel and degrading treatment in prison. In October authorities denied permission for a protest planned for November 15 and threatened organizers. The government conducted summary trials for some protesters; sought long prison sentences, some up to 30 years, in hundreds of cases; and held other protesters in extended pretrial detention. Some activists chose to go into exile, and the government forced others to do so.

Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: unlawful or arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings, by the government; forced disappearance by the government; torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment of political dissidents, detainees, and prisoners by security forces; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrests and detentions; political prisoners; serious problems with the independence of the judiciary; arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy; reprisals against family members for offenses allegedly committed by an individual; serious restrictions on freedom of expression and media including violence or threats of violence against journalists, censorship, and criminal libel laws used against persons who criticized government leadership; serious restrictions on internet freedom; severe restrictions on the right of peaceful assembly and denial of freedom of association, including refusal to recognize independent associations; severe restrictions on religious freedom; restrictions on internal and external freedom of movement; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections, including serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation; serious government corruption; a lack of investigation of and accountability for gender-based violence; trafficking in persons, including forced labor; and outlawing of independent trade unions.

Government officials, at the direction of their superiors, committed most human rights abuses. As a matter of policy, officials failed to investigate or prosecute those who committed these abuses. Impunity for the perpetrators remained widespread, as was impunity for official corruption.

Illustration: Pixabay

American progressives have long idolized Leftist regimes in Latin America. Hollywood producers and celebrities have spoken glowingly of these governments.

It is instructive to see how they actually perform in terms of human rights.  For the next two days, we will present the official State Department reviews of Cuba and Venezuela. Today, we focus on executive summary of Venezuela.

While Venezuela is legally a multiparty, constitutional republic, the authoritarian regime led by Nicolas Maduro usurped control over all branches of government: executive, judicial, legislative, the offices of the prosecutor general and ombudsman, and the electoral institutions. In December 2020 the Maduro regime organized parliamentary elections that were rigged in favor of the regime, and approximately 60 countries and international bodies publicly declared the elections were neither free nor fair.

Civilian authorities’ control over the security forces continued to decline and was deeply politicized. Increasingly unpopular with citizens, the Maduro regime depended on civilian and military intelligence services, and to a lesser extent, progovernment armed gangs known as colectivos, to neutralize political opposition and subdue the population. The Bolivarian National Guard – a branch of the military that reports to the Ministry of Defense and the Ministry of Interior, Justice, and Peace – is responsible for maintaining public order, guarding the exterior of key government installations and prisons, conducting counternarcotics operations, monitoring borders, and providing law enforcement in remote areas. The Ministry of Interior, Justice, and Peace controls the National Scientific Criminal, and Investigative Corps, which conducts most criminal investigations, and the Bolivarian National Intelligence Service, which collects intelligence within the country and abroad and is responsible for investigating cases of corruption, subversion, and arms trafficking. Police include municipal, state, and national police forces. Mayors and governors oversee municipal and state police forces. The Bolivarian National Police report to the Ministry of Interior, Justice, and Peace. The national police largely focused on policing Caracas’ Libertador municipality; patrolling Caracas-area highways, railways, and metro system; and protecting diplomatic missions. The national armed forces patrolled other areas of the country. There were credible reports that members of security forces committed numerous abuses, and a 2020 United Nations report concluded there were reasonable grounds to believe that Maduro regime authorities and security forces committed crimes against humanity.

Significant human rights issues included credible reports of: unlawful or arbitrary killings, including extrajudicial killings by regime forces; forced disappearances by the regime; torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment by security forces; harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; arbitrary arrest or detention by security forces; political prisoners or detainees; serious problems with independence of the judiciary; unlawful interference with privacy; punishment of family members for offenses allegedly committed by an individual; serious restrictions on free expression and media, including violence or threats of violence against journalists, unjustified arrests or prosecutions of journalists, and censorship; serious restrictions on internet freedom; substantial interference with the freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association, including overly restrictive laws on the organization, funding, or operation of nongovernmental organizations and civil society organizations; inability of citizens to change their government peacefully through free and fair elections; serious and unreasonable restrictions on political participation; serious government corruption; serious restrictions on or harassment of domestic and international human rights organizations; lack of investigation of and accountability for gender-based violence; significant barriers to accessing reproductive health; trafficking in persons; crimes involving violence or threats of violence targeting indigenous persons and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or intersex persons; and the worst forms of child labor.

The Maduro regime took no effective action to identify, investigate, prosecute, or punish officials who committed human rights abuses or corruption.

There were numerous reports that the Maduro regime committed arbitrary or unlawful killings. Although the regime did not release statistics on extrajudicial killings, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) reported that national, state, and municipal police entities, as well as the armed forces and regime-supported colectivos, carried out hundreds of such killings during the year. In September the UN Independent Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on Venezuela also noted, for the second consecutive year, concern regarding “extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearance, arbitrary detentions, and torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, including sexual and gender-based violence.” The FFM report stated “real and perceived opponents or critics” of the Maduro regime increasingly included individuals and organizations that documented, denounced, or attempted to address human rights or social and economic problems in the country. The FFM concluded that it had reasonable grounds to believe the justice system had played a significant role in the state’s repression of government opponents.

The Public Ministry is responsible for initiating judicial investigations of security force abuses. The Office for Protection of Human Rights in the Public Ministry is responsible for investigating cases involving crimes committed by public officials, particularly security officials. There was, however, no official information available on the number of public officials prosecuted, convicted, or sentenced to prison for involvement in extrajudicial killings, which, in the case of killings committed by police, were often classified as “resistance to authority.”

Illustration: Pixabay

“Bullets accidentally ended up on the territory of Tajikistan” after a shootout between Taliban and the Islamic State – Khorasan Province (ISKP) forces near the Afghan-Tajik border, according to Nurbek Bekmurazev, of the Jamestown Foundation. Last month Radio Ozodi reported that several rockets were launched from the Hojagor district of Takhar province, Afghanistan into the neighboring Panj district in Tajikistan. Bekmurazev says that a “GKNB [Tajikistan State Security Committee] statement… argued the situation on the border was stable, and the Taliban was conducting operations to locate and disarm the perpetrators.” Western analysts following Central Asia are growing increasingly concerned about intensifying ISKP activities in Afghanistan and neighboring states. The recent rocket attack was the second in three weeks in Tajikistan. Conflicting reports coming out of Central Asia attribute the attacks to both Taliban and ISKP forces. 

Taliban leaders, according to Bekmurazev, are frustrated by what they call “false accusations.” They have been targeted by the ISKP terrorists in the past. In November 2019 terrorists attacked the Ishkobod border station as a sign of loyalty to the new caliph and in August 2018 four tourists in the Dangara region of Tajikistan were killed and three foreign citizens injured. The UN Security Council reports that recent attacks continue the trend of Islamic State – Khorasan Province.  ISKP power is growing since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan last August. Since then, the number of its operatives has “increased from 2,000 to roughly 4,000, with some new recruits coming from recently released prisoners in Afghanistan,” according to an early May 2022 NY Times article. In recent weeks the violence has drawn the attention of both China and Russia.

The Taliban want to be viewed as a security partner. These attacks are straining its credibility and undermining “its promise that the territory of Afghanistan will not be used for launching terrorist attacks on foreign countries,” says Bekmurazev. Central Asian military analysts are concerned that the deep mistrust between Tajikistan and other Central Asian states and the Taliban could further destabilize the region. The level of violence has risen dramatically over the last two weeks in the Pamir region of Tajikistan and is now higher than any period since the 1997 civil war ended. 

Radio Ozodi reports that on May 16 law enforcement used tear gas and snipers to break up protests and quickly cut off the region’s internet connection. The following day the government launched a “counter-terrorism” operation, killing dozens and arresting hundreds. While the numbers killed, injured, or arrested may not be large in comparison to the war in Ukraine, it marks an increase in violence covering almost half of Tajikistan’s territory. In 2015 the government used the violence to justify silencing the opposition Islamic Renaissance Party. 

Unrest in the Pamir region of Tajikistan, in particular, is strategically significant as it is located along the border area with China and contains the only open crossing between the two countries. It is a lucrative commercial trade route and one the Chinese watch carefully due to its use as a drug transit route into Western China.  Edward Lemon, writing in the Eurasia Daily Monitor, reports that although the US has provided Tajikistan with over $364 million in security assistance since 2000, Dushanbe “leans increasingly on China and Russia for patronage, [and] the Tajikistani government is scapegoating the West for the violence its own policies have helped create or amplify.” Analysts monitoring the violence suggest that the situation has deteriorated to the point that ever more “people in Dushanbe and Moscow are openly talking about the risk that conditions there may soon trigger a full-scale civil war.”

Paul Goble, of the Jamestown Foundation, points out that “Dushanbe’s problems have compelled it to publicly ask Moscow to be ready to send forces into the region, just as [Moscow] did in Kazakhstan last January.” Tajikistan’s President has formerly requested Russian President Vladimir Putin be prepared to quell violence as it destabilizes the whole Central Asian region. 

Although the war in Ukraine has overshadowed many of the recent events in Central Asia, Xi Jinping is monitoring the situation. A sect of Islam led by the Aga Khna, an Ismali, is gaining influence in the area and could provoke a response from China. Beijing considers him a dangerous threat. Xi has placed military capabilities inside Tajikistan, and is prepared to act, if necessary. The Chinese government has made it clear in recent statements that it would like to take control of the Pamir region. The region is a powder keg that could blow, according to one analyst familiar with the environment on the ground.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: Tajikistan (photo)

China is a dangerous and complex puzzle the democratic world must deal with in the coming years. Many in the West, upon hearing Chinese officials reference a “third child,” will assume the discussion concerns Beijing’s archaic population policy. In reality, officials are using the term today to reference China’s latest accomplishment… the upcoming launch of its third modern aircraft carrier. The ship, a Type 003 carrier, is being readied for its initial launch for sea trials, possibly as soon as this weekend. As the shipbuilders in Shanghai’s Jiangnan Yard prepare for the event, military analysts in Washington note that the ship will be the most advanced produced by China and contain electromagnetic catapult aircraft launchers to provide an extended strike range for its fighter jets. China’s first two carriers employed a ”ski ramp” style launch system which limited the amount of fuel and weapons jets could carry. The US maintains a qualitative advantage over China’s large maritime fleet; however, Beijing is closing the gap. Given recent annual increases in Chinese military spending, defense analysts expect China to advance beyond the US in many areas in the next few years. While the latest carrier is good military news for Xi Jinping, not all is not going well politically for China in the Indo-Pacific region. 

Earlier this week in Fiji Chinese Foreign Affairs Minister Wang Yi, and other officials from Beijing negotiating a mutual trade and security agreement with 10 Pacific Island nations, failed to secure a deal. American Military News is reporting that during the Summit China attempted to bring together the Federated States of Micronesia, the Solomon Islands, Kiribati, Samoa, Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Niue, and Timor-Leste. Wang’s goal was thwarted when the independent countries refused to join a pact that included law enforcement and fishing cooperation along with port calls for PLAN security forces and ships. The United States also is countering China’s Indo-Pacific efforts by forming its own trade and diplomatic alliances and partnerships in the region. Recently several Pacific states signed the US-led Pacific Economic Framework (PEF), including Fiji, which had hosted China for the 10-country Summit.

Further south in the Pacific puzzle, Australia is holding elections for its Prime Minister. China is closely watching those events while simultaneously trying to infiltrate and control the public discourse to direct it away from Beijing’s previous attempts to influence Australian election results. According to John Garrick of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), Xi Jinping is an oligarch who seeks to forcefully influence international financial, legal, and trade systems. He argues that Xi’s dream of a national rejuvenation for China extends to “exerting global leadership and shaping international institutions to better reflect China’s great-power status.” This includes a desire to control Australia’s politics and economy at every level of society. 

Domestically the puzzle is no less challenging for Xi Jinping. A major cache of internal reports recently leaked from the Xinjiang Police Department reveal an inside view of the environment and scale of Beijing’s secretive campaign interning almost 2 million Uyghurs and other minorities in northwestern China. The number of files exposed is mind-boggling. There are over 300,000 verified personnel records, more than 23,000 detainee files, and 2,884 images of detainees themselves. Adrian Zenz, an international expert on internal Chinese government documents and the Xinjiang internment campaign says they were hacked directly from Chinese police databases in two ethnic minority counties in Xinjiang. Zenz says this is the first time the world has a first-hand account of police operations from police computer centers. The records include statements and speeches by the former Xinjiang Party Secretary Chen Quanguo, who talks about the oppressive attitude of the Chinese government toward the Muslim minorities located in the region. He says the camps need to be defended and explains why the government has to move against the entire population. Xi Jinping will be challenged to explain these documents to a world already reeling from event in Ukraine.

China is both a complex and dangerous puzzle that no one is close to solving. It has strengths but also pervasive weaknesses and paranoia that could be exploited by the West. It may be time for democratic nations to use those weaknesses to teach China a lesson in how to behave as a responsible member in an international rules-based system. 

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Department

Photo: Chinese aircraft carrier (China Defence Ministry)

The macro-Arctic geographic area is heating up politically this year with Russia announcing that it must meet two strategic goals to maintain its dominance over the northern region. The first is exploiting the overall region’s economic potential, according to Sergey Sukhankin of the Jamestown Foundation. He argues that Russia intends to accomplish this “through an intensification of exports of non-renewable energy resources and liquefied natural gas (LNG) in particular.” The second, just as concerning to Arctic Council states, is the development of a new Northern Sea Route. This evolving maritime transportation corridor is tangential to Russia’s coastline and will serve as a substitute for linking Asia to Europe in lieu of transiting the Suez Canal. 

While the concept of a year-round, open water route across the northern Arctic is not new, it does point to Russia’s reorientation toward Asia and key to it emerging as a major trading and geopolitical partner with China in the coming years. With Russia struggling to win its war in Ukraine, increased sanctions by Western states, and general world condemnation of its human rights abuses, Putin may find China one of the few countries willing to conduct business with his country. After Moscow released the first strategy document labeled “On the Development of the Arctic Zone and Ensuring National Security Until 2035,” it appeared Putin would be able to implement his strategy, according to Sukhankin. In January 2022, he points out, Russia’s gas giant Novatek concluded a long-term deal with China’s ENN Natural Gas and Zhejiang Energy. It commits Moscow to supplying 1 million tons of LNG per annum to the Chinese market for the next 15 years. A year before Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, Novatek had signed another LNG contract with the Chinese Shenergy Group. Although it appeared Russian strategy was working, since the February invasion of Ukraine, the Arctic policy has stalled.

As the war drags into it fourth month, Putin is facing four major challenges to his ambitious Arctic policy. Western sanctions, which restrict its supply of the advanced technology components needed for LNG production. In its fifth round of sanctions the European Union barred EU producers from directly or indirectly supply Russia, unlike the 2014 rules which allowed the world’s largest industrial gas company German Linde, to supply Putin with critical production technologies. In particular, the current sanctions are a major obstacle to Putin’s strategic Arctic LNG2 mega-project. Sukhankin says that the single domestically supplied LNG  project in Russia, is suffering from technical difficulties. Only states unfriendly to Russia have the large-scale liquefaction technology its needs to become a major play in the LNG marketplace. Prior to sanctions Russia purchased all the required technology from the US and Western Europe. 

The second challenge facing Putin is how to encourage foreign investors not to pull out of Arctic-based energy projects like the 50-50 Gydan Energy joint venture that Gazprom Neft has with Shell. This project, originally planned as the center of an Arctic energy cluster, was scheduled to open in 2028. French Total Energies and the Japanese firm Mitsui and KOGMEC already announced their intention to withdraw, leaving Russia unable to carry out financial transactions related to the LNG2 mega project. As foreign investors lose interest in working with Russia, a newer player also appears ready to leave the scene. Last week, rumors inside China appear to confirm that three of its largest energy firms – Sinopec, China National Offshore Oil and China National Petroleum Corp, along with five other large Chinese engineering companies, all are stalling on future investments according to a May 23 story in the Moscow Times. 

Decreased LNG production in the Arctic is the third challenge, as Putin is finding it more difficult to secure foreign funding. Domestically, large Russian banks, including Sber, Gazprombank, VEB.RF, and Otkrytie FC Bank, having come under sanctions. So far, Moscow has not found other funding for the mega-project. Sukhankin points to a fourth challenge – restricted Russian access to delivery methods. Reports indicate that the three largest shipbuilders in South Korea recently cancelled their $872 million contract to partner with Russian LNG producers to build large LNG ships to work in the Arctic. Although the loss of six ships is a huge blow to Russia, Sakhankin says there may be an even greater impact as Russia was in discussions to build an additional 15 ships with Korean-based Samsung Heavy Industries. If talks fail, which is likely, Russia’s Arctic strategy may fail. Although China and India may fill the gap, Russia’s grad Arctic strategy is facing serious blows since Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Most nations appear willing to forego the economic benefits to try to force Putin to abandon his war in Ukraine. Putin is faced with two choices in the Arctic. It is highly likely that he will be forced to shut down his future plans. If not, he may emerge as a more dangerous adversary to the free world.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: Pixabay

Americans flocked to see the sequel to Top Gun, the popular classic that has served as an ode to American air power.

China has been less than thrilled about that, and is using their already heavy influence on U.S. media to express its displeasure. According to the Wall Street Journal, The Chinese tech firm Tencent Holdings, which had originally agreed to co-sponsor the film “backed out of the $170 million Paramount Pictures production after they grew concerned that Communist Party officials in Beijing would be angry about the company’s affiliation with a movie celebrating the American military.”

While the blockbuster Tom Cruise was released anyway, “The Chinese are financing some of your favorite films, buying theater chains, it is a growing trend. Major Chinese production companies teaming up with Tinseltown, which is leading to concerns over pro-China propaganda making its way into major American blockbusters” notes a Heritage study.

The Wall Street Journal had previously reported that Chinese companies engaged in $4.5 billion in purchases of Hollywood assets. “The new dynamic highlights Hollywood’s dependence on China, where the slightest change in state policy has ripple effects across the entertainment industry. China’s deep pockets have become a frequent topic of speculation and intrigue among entertainment executives, some of whom see the country as full of prospective buyers willing to pay high premiums for flashy Hollywood holdings.”

Some of China’s influence has been very overt.  Several years ago, a remake of the cult classic “Red Dawn” was originally scripted to portray China as the villain.  Beijing cracked its financial whip, and another nation was substituted.

An NBC Today review notes that “If you got to a movie theater right now, there’s a pretty good chance that the film you see will have been partially financed in China.”

To understand how China’s investment provides influence for the Beijing government, it must be understood that Chinese companies are subservient to and work diligently for China’s foreign policy. That, however, is only part of the story.  The appetite for films in China’s largest-in-the world population is vast, and even those Hollywood studies not financially dependent on China have a significant financial interest in producing movies that appeal to their worldview, even if that is detrimental to American interests.

Politico provides another example of the interrelationship between Chinese companies buying major stakes in Hollywood and Beijing’s political goals. Dalian Wanda is a Chinese firm that has intimate ties to the Chinese Communist Party, and it is intent on making major purchases of Hollywood assets. The publication asks,  asks “For American moviegoers, the peril lies in the unseen. Would a war movie called South China Sea ever play in one of Wanda’s theaters? What about an action flick with a Chinese villain?…When you control the movie experience, you can subtly influence public opinion. And the Chinese government — Wanda’s staunch supporter — has been transparent about that goal. The Communist Party has banned or currently bans thousands of books deemed controversial. It heavily censors the Internet, while Facebook and Twitter remain prohibited in China — one of the reasons Freedom House ranked it a more restrictive society than Iran and Saudi Arabia.”

China has succeeded in influencing citizens of the West in ways the former Soviet Union never had the sophistication to understand. Moscow may have (and still does) finance anti-defense spending advocates and those seeking to destroy American energy independence, Beijing, with its huge cash reserves, buys influence in major  influencing outlets, including Hollywood and academia.

Even more directly, China buys influence in major sources of information. The Times of India reports that Beijing buys or otherwise recruits influencers on such platforms as Facebook and TikTok.

Illustration: Pixabay