1Chairman of the Management Board and of the Strategic Orientation Board of the Institute of Higher Studies of Latin America (IHEAL) of the Sorbonne Nouvelle-Paris III University, Stéphane Witkowski is a recognized specialist in Cuba and Latin America. His shrewd outlook and his up-to-date analyzes make him one of the best French connoisseurs of this geographical area, which has earned him regular invitations in the media. He coordinates the Cuba study group at IHEAL. He is also a member of the Orientation Council of the Center for Studies and Research “Latin America-Europe”, CERALE of ESCP Europe.

2He was head of the “Americas” department of MEDEF international for ten years, in charge of the “South America - Central America and Caribbean - United States – Canada” area. He was also Director of Institutional Relations for the ALTADIS Group and Director of International and European Relations at the Assembly of French Chambers of Commerce and Industry (ACFCI now CCI France). In 2009, he created BALE Conseil, a firm specializing in consulting and business engineering which provides support to French and Latin American companies wishing to develop their international activities.

3In this interview, Stéphane Witkowski provides a historical perspective of the tumultuous relationship between Cuba and the United States and reviews the genesis of this conflict. He discusses the issue of economic sanctions imposed on the island since 1960. He also analyzes the reasons which led the Obama administration to adopt a policy of rapprochement with Havana. He finally takes stock of the Trump era and concludes with the election of Joe Biden and the possibilities of a return to a more constructive policy towards Cuba.

4Salim Lamrani: Cuba and the United States have had a complex relationship for over half a century. What are the real roots of this conflict?

5Stéphane Witkowski: Relations between the two countries are above all dictated by geography and history, by the proximity of this “small island”, if I judge by its GDP and by its area, although Cuba is the largest island in the Caribbean. From a distance of only a few kilometers, Cuba is “facing the Empire”, to use Fidel Castro’s expression, “the most important Empire since the Roman Empire”.

6All the presidents of the United States, from John Adams, the second president who was in power between 1797 and 1801, who already considered Cuba to be part of his zone of natural influence, until Joe Biden in 2021, whether they have been Democrats or Republicans, have always tried to keep the island in the orbit of their country. They did it by very variable means, styles and methods but always keeping the same objective: to control the destiny of Cuba. In fact, James Monroe, the fifth president of the United States, had defined his doctrine, which became famous on December 2, 1823, and which can be summed up in three points: North and South America are no longer open to colonization; any European intervention in the affairs of the continent will be seen as a threat to security and peace; in return, the United States will not intervene in European affairs.

7This doctrine, which dates from the 19^th century and was put back on the agenda by Donald Trump, is perfectly illustrated by the case of Cuba. Thus, we can neither explain nor understand and even less analyze the situation in Cuba today without having in mind this basic fact: The United States of America has always considered the island of Cuba to be theirs.

8 SL: When did this desire of the United States to take possession of Cuba materialize?

9SW: The major turning point took place at the end of the 19^th century. 1898 is the symbolic date of the advent of the U.S. Empire, with the explosion on January 15 of the battleship USS Maine in the port of Havana. This gave the United States the pretext it needed to go to war, in April of the same year, against Spain, to seize the last Spanish colonies, namely Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Philippines, and thus ensure the monopoly of control of the Americas.

10It should be noted that this is also one of the first media wars of contemporary times. The aim was to “sell” the aggression as a humanitarian intervention, to American public opinion, intended to rescue the Cubans oppressed by the “vile Spaniards”. The two newspaper magnates of the time, Joseph Pulitzer, who ran the New York World, and Randolph Hearst, who headed the New York Journal, competed with horrific images and tales of the cruelty of the Crown soldiers, publishing, for example, fake photos of concentration camps where Cuban prisoners were starving. This media bombardment made it possible to build public opinion calling for war.

11The takeover of Cuba by the United States was a defining event in the history of U.S. imperialism. Until then limited by the Monroe Doctrine which granted them control of the Latin American backyard, the United States then decided to also become “masters of the rest of the world”.

12SL: What were the consequences of this military intervention for Cuba?

13SW: The Treaty of Paris of December 1898 between the United States and Spain, which ends the war between the two countries and the Cuban war of independence, provides in its first article for the indefinite occupation of Cuba.

14Finally, formal independence was proclaimed on May 20, 1902, but Senator Orville Hitchcock Platt had the United States Congress passed on March 2, 1901 an amendment to the budget law which established “special links” between the two countries, and founds Washington’s right to intervene “to preserve the independence of Cuba”. The United States demanded that the amendment be inserted into the Cuban Constitution, which was finally accepted by the Cuban Constituent Assembly on June 12, 1901, by a narrow majority of 16 votes to 11, after heated debates. Under the guise of protecting the independence of Cuba, this text places the country under U.S. protectorate. This American legal provision formalized the right of United States interference in Cuba and the installation of two naval bases with a perpetual lease, including that of Guantanamo, which is still in force.

15SL: What was the reality of pre-revolutionary Cuba?

16SW: For a long time, the various Cuban governments pursued a policy largely in line with American interests, which were considerable on the island. Mafia bosses like Meyer Lansky and Lucky Luciano had the ambition to turn Cuba into a sort of Las Vegas and impose the reign of games, casinos and prostitution there. Their HQ was the famous Hotel Nacional in Havana. These excesses were tolerated by Washington with the complicity of the regime of dictator Fulgencio Batista who ruled the country from 1952 to 1958 and who was overthrown by a popular and national revolution.

17This Revolution, led by Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Raul Castro and the other “Revolutionary Commanders”, enjoyed immense popular support in the country. The American authorities had viewed the coming to power of Fidel Castro in 1959 with a certain suspicion and concern, even if, at the time, the latter did not call himself a “communist”. The climate began to deteriorate in 1960.

18SL: What was the reason for the first tensions between Cuba and the United States?

19SW: The implementation of the Cuban revolutionary government’s program of structural reforms and nationalizations came up against the issue of compensation. Fidel Castro graduated as a lawyer, and he always wanted to respect, in all circumstances, the rule of public international law. Throughout his political life, he was never at fault on this front.

20In the aftermath of the nationalizations, compensation commissions were set up with all countries and foreign investors already present on the island. Agreements have been concluded with most of the countries concerned. The only country to have refused any transaction was the United States. Legal disputes have multiplied and a protracted divorce has taken place with Washington: the rupture of diplomatic relations in January 1961, numerous destabilization enterprises aimed at eliminating the Cuban regime, the attempted invasion during the landing of the Bay of Pigs in April 1961, the blockade / embargo decreed on February 2, 1962 still in force today, the missile crisis in October 1962. Sanctions have often been wrongly associated with the context of the Cold War. But the origin of the embargo predated and was therefore not attributable to U.S.-Soviet rivalries. The best proof of this is that the embargo continues despite the disappearance of the USSR.

21Failing to have succeeded in arousing the interest of Europe, which was then focused on the creation of its “common market”, Fidel Castro turned to the Soviet Union, the only one to have understood the strategic interest in forging this partnership with the island in the context of the Cold War. The antagonism has continued to grow. Havana has nevertheless always displayed a willingness to negotiate with the Americans on a basis of equality and respect for its national sovereignty. This has been a problem for the thirteen presidents who have succeeded in the White House since 1959.

22In other words, beyond the page of history that was written by Fidel and Raul Castro, Cuba’s relations with the United States raise the question of national independence but also of national identity in the face of to the mighty neighbor. This is the key to understanding all the developments to come.

23SL: How did Fidel Castro look at the various U.S. administrations?

24SW: Fidel Castro has stood up to eleven North American presidents, from Eisenhower to Barack Obama. But it seems to me that he had respect and consideration for three of them, without deluding himself too much: Kennedy, Carter and Obama.

25He considered Kennedy to be his equal, even though he had been a tough opponent during the 1962 Missile Crisis. He esteemed the man and had received an unofficial message from him through journalist Jean Daniel proposing reconciliation between the two countries, the same day he was assassinated in Dallas.

26He liked Jimmy Carter and admired his great intelligence and goodwill. He also planned for “normalization” with Cuba, if he had been re-elected in a second term. He was also the first former U.S. president to meet with Fidel Castro in Havana in May 2002 and then in March 2011 and described him as an “old friend”.

27Finally, Barack Obama was considered by Cuban leaders as “a man of good will”. Unlike his predecessors, Obama, a young president, born in 1961, had not known the failure and humiliation of the Bay of Pigs landing. It has remained as the greatest trauma in U.S. diplomatic relations. Under these conditions, from Havana’s point of view, a dialogue was possible with the President of the United States on two conditions. First, the two countries should talk to each other as equals while respecting Cuba’s national sovereignty. “Everything is negotiable except sovereignty”, Fidel and Raul Castro have repeatedly said. Second, the United States had to end the embargo and admit that it had been wrong for more than 50 years. This is what Obama implicitly did when he acknowledged it in his famous televised speech on December 17, 2014. He had several other occasions to point out that American policy towards Cuba had been wrong since the Revolution of 1959 and that the blockade / embargo objective of overthrowing the regime had been a total failure. From then on, diplomatic relations could be established.

28SL: Under what conditions did the historic rapprochement between Cuba and the United States occur in 2014?

29SW: The rapprochement between Cuba and the United States has been prepared for a long time. The influence exerted by all Latin American and Caribbean countries and the role of Pope Francis have been decisive in this development. Most of the secret negotiating meetings between Cubans and Americans were held with the support of Vatican diplomacy.

30Cuban diplomacy is renowned for its professionalism, like two other countries in the region, that of Brazil before Bolsonaro came to power, and that of Peru. The Peruvian Pérez de Cuellar, who had been U.N. General Secretary, symbolized it quite well. Havana had deployed its strategy on different fronts. In various chanceries, despite a certain media indifference, it was observed that in January 2014, the second summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) was held in Havana, under Cuban presidency, bringing together 32 Heads of State and Government of the countries of the region, as well as the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon. The warning sent to Washington was clear: until Cuba was invited to summits in the Americas – due to US opposition – Latin American countries would no longer participate in these meetings. Washington feared being isolated across the Americas. Barack Obama wanted to get out of his diplomatic isolation on the Cuban issue and, during his speech on December 17, 2014, pronounced his famous phrase “Somos todos americanos”. It thus included Cuba.

31Cuba has a great influence in Latin America as a major player in the settlement of certain conflicts such as the peace negotiations initiated with the FARC in Colombia, held in Havana. It also enjoys great prestige in many Third World countries and in Africa, as evidenced by the regular dispatch of Cuban doctors whenever there is an epidemic or a natural or humanitarian disaster. Cuba has sent doctors to around 50 countries to deal with the Covid-19 pandemic. In the recent past, Cuba has also sent 165 experts to fight Ebola in Africa. According to the World Health Organization, this was the largest contingent sent by a state, earning Cuba praise from Secretary of State John Kerry himself. This was a precursor to this rapprochement. There was also a symbolic handshake between Raul Castro and Barack Obama during Nelson Mandela’s funeral. In fact, Nelson Mandela and Fidel Castro were great friends. It should be remembered that Cuba supported Mandela from the start of his struggle for liberation and the struggle against apartheid.

32In addition, Russia and China were developing their relations at all levels with Cuba. There were visits by the Chinese and Russian presidents to Havana in the summer of 2014 and important trade deals were signed. The China of President Xi Jinping had become the island’s second largest trading partner, and Vladimir Putin had canceled 90% of Cuban debt to the former USSR. Very important cooperation and trade agreements had been signed in the energy and oil fields. There was the construction of a new airport in Havana, the creation of a Cuban-Russian airline and agreements in the fields of agriculture, health, transport and tourism. This double Cuba-China and Cuba-Russia rapprochement seriously worried the State Department and Barack Obama could no longer remain passive.

33SL: Cuba has long been viewed as a domestic political issue by the United States due to the large Cuban community in Florida. Has there been an evolution on this subject?

34SW: Indeed, for a long time, the “Cuban case” was treated in the United States as a domestic political issue. Any American president – Democrat or Republican – could not do without the political and financial lobby of Miami or New Jersey, which represents approximately 1.5 million Cuban Americans, and which weighs heavily on both Congress and the White House. We remember how George W. Bush’s first election ahead of Al Gore in 2000 played out in Florida. In the American primaries, Republican candidates like Senators Marco Rubio or Ted Cruz, who are the sons of Cuban emigrants, or Democrat Robert Menendez, emphasize the weight of this community in American political life.

35The election of Barack Obama had already changed things a bit because he was a young president, with no particular ties or special knowledge of Latin America and the Caribbean. He had never been there before he was president and was not prejudiced against Cuba. Moreover, he had been elected and re-elected with a large majority in Florida. He had always spoken out against the embargo, including when he was a senator, and wanted to mark his last presidential term. In addition, it was also a way to illustrate his Nobel Peace Prize which he received at the start of his term.

36In addition, the Cuban community in the United States is very divided. The historic anti-Castro leaders of the powerful Cuban-American National Foundation (CANF) in Miami have given way to another generation, younger, more lucid and more sensitive to economic arguments. The active agricultural lobbies – in particular from the Midwest – and American pharmaceuticals obtained an exception in the embargo in 2000, which allowed the United States to become – paradoxically – the first food supplier of Cuba for more than ten years and the island’s fifth largest trading partner. The President of the American Chamber of Commerce, Thomas Donohue, has visited Cuba several times, accompanied by large delegations of businessmen, and is campaigning for the lifting of the embargo.

37American public opinion had become more favorable to lifting the embargo. This was followed by the publication of an open letter from 44 American figures and intellectuals and the publication of the Hillary Clinton Memoirs which acknowledge the failure of the sanctions. However, her husband Bill Clinton had been one of the toughest towards Cuba and had passed an extraterritorial law, contrary to international law, under his mandate thus reinforcing the embargo: the Helms-Burton Act in 1996.

38SL: What was the Cuban position in this process of rapprochement?

39SW: On the Cuban side, Raul Castro knew he had to step down from all his official duties no later than April 2021, during the 8^th CCP Congress. Fidel Castro himself had retired from active political life as early as 2006-2008. He knew that a page was turned, both personally and politically. They knew that they were in the best position, given their political and historical weight, to be able to negotiate a rapprochement with the Americans, in order to leave their successors a country that could treat as equals with the powerful neighbor. Coincidentally, Barack Obama and Raul Castro both came to power in 2008 and stepped down from their presidential positions, virtually at the same time, a year apart.

40In addition, for years, working groups from both countries have been meeting on a regular basis. They relate not only to questions of security, but also to police cooperation in combatting drug trafficking, postal cooperation and cultural and academic exchanges.

41SL: What role did the Vatican play in this rapprochement and what conditions were negotiated at the historic announcement of December 17, 2014?

42SW: Pope Francis was able to count on the very high quality of the Vatican’s intelligence services. Being Latin American himself, he understood well how much an active diplomacy of the Vatican could play its role in the evolution of this regional context, following the path of Pope John Paul II in 1998 who called on “the world to open up to Cuba and Cuba to open up to the world”. The wish of the Polish Pope, who had established a personal and epistolary relationship with the Leader of the Cuban Revolution, came true. Moreover, Cuba decreed three days of national mourning for the death of Pope John Paul II.

43Several conditions had been negotiated for this rapprochement: the opening of two full-service embassies, one in Washington, the other in Havana; the removal of Cuba from the blacklist of so-called “terrorist” countries and the full application of the Vienna Convention governing diplomatic relations.

44SL: Why have the economic sanctions imposed on Cuba since 1960 not been lifted?

45SW: Normalization between the two countries effectively involves lifting the embargo and that depends mainly on Congress. President Obama himself had called for the lifting of the embargo, including before the U.N. General Assembly, but did not obtain it.

46It should be remembered that the embargo has been condemned every year since 1992 by the votes of the UN General Assembly and the Cuban motion has obtained near unanimity among member countries. This American policy of sanctions has immediate concrete effects for the Cuban population. Cuba cannot access any of the major international financial institutions, be it the IMF, the World Bank or the Inter-American Development Bank. It deprives companies of the possibility of finding sources of financing and is applied in all its rigor, with all that that implies in terms of fines, restrictions, missed deals.

47This is not only the case for North American companies and banks, but also for companies in Europe and other third parties as a result of U.S. extraterritorial laws. This concerns the banking sector, the transport sector, logistics and construction, but also affects the health sector. Thus, the Treasury Department has placed several Cuban health institutions such as the Pediatric Heart Center, the Frank País orthopedic complex or the Institute of Hematology and Immunology on a blacklist of “banned hospitals”, to which American companies or third parties do not have the right to sell equipment or products from the United States.

48SL: Has France been affected by these sanctions?

49SW: In May 2015, BNP Paribas was fined a record $ 8.9 billion for having maintained, among other things, financial relations with Cuba. In October 2015, Crédit Agricole was fined $ 1.116 billion for the same reasons. It should be remembered that BNP Paribas and Crédit Agricole have not violated any French legislation and have scrupulously observed European and international law.

50Other financial entities in Europe such as Société Générale have also been heavily sanctioned. The German bank Commerzbank had to pay a fine of 1.71 billion dollars and put an end to all relations with Cuba. It should also be remembered that the Alstom group, before becoming GE Alstom with the merger of the American group, had to pay a fine of $ 772 million because the group's energy branch had renovated the Matanzas plant in Cuba.

51SL: So, despite its formal opposition to economic sanctions, the Obama administration nonetheless applied them strictly.

52SW: During the Obama presidency, from 2009 to 2015, 45 corporations paid $ 13 billion in fines to the U.S. Treasury for transactions with Cuba. Cuban authorities have estimated the damage the embargo inflicted on the island’s economy at $ 121 billion.

53These laws are contrary to international law. They also violate international commitments made by the United States, be it WTO rules and NAFTA. For the Helms-Burton Act, the non-respect of international rules is even more flagrant because it violates the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention in the internal affairs of a state. The declared objective of this law is political: the fall of the Cuban government. It precisely determines what can be considered a “transitional government” and imposes a market economy. In addition, it demands the restitution of American property nationalized by the current regime. This legislation prohibits anyone in the world from “trafficking” in goods that have been U.S. possessions, under penalty of sanctions. This very broad definition may include, for example, the purchase of sugar produced on land that belonged to Americans before their nationalization. It should be remembered that the European Union is Cuba’s largest investor, largest trading partner and the largest source of tourists to the island. The objective of the United States is to ward off foreign competition in the region, in accordance with the Monroe doctrine.

54It should be remembered that the Trump administration activated Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, which had been suspended since 1996. It specifies that current American nationals whose property was nationalized between 1959 and 1961 have the possibility of suing in U.S. courts anyone in the world “trafficking” in old property. From a practical standpoint, the legal uncertainty surrounding this activation dissuades potential new investors interested in the Cuban market from doing business with Cuba and encourages those present to leave the country.

55SL: What has the Trump administration’s policy been towards Cuba?

56SW: Donald Trump overturned the policy of openness towards Cuba initiated in December 2014 by Barack Obama. During his tenure, he unraveled all the advances made by his predecessor, until the last days of his presidency, since before leaving the White House, he put Cuba back on the list of countries “sponsoring terrorism”. which is shameful when we know that Cuba was a victim of terrorism and had to suffer more than 3,000 deaths on its territory.

57Trump was unable to reverse the resumption of diplomatic relations between the two countries, but he adopted a series of measures, more than 250, to limit, among other things, the visits of “American tourists” authorized to go to the island under an increasingly restricted list of exceptions and limiting financial transfers from the diaspora to Cuba. It prohibited any form of transaction with entities linked to the regime. And he activated Title III of the Helms-Burton Act.

58He had been rude and insulting when Fidel Castro died on November 25, 2016 when a large number of Cubans felt “orphaned”. Like any nation that is touched by the loss of a great historical figure associated with its country, the words uttered by Trump on this occasion have been seen as a lack of respect for a people and for a country. Even though he had retired from all official duties for ten years or so, he remained “Fidel”, the Commander, the “soldier of ideas”. Cubans were proud of him because he was the last “giant of the twentieth century”, the man who had not only embodied sovereignty, independence and a part of Cuban identity, in the wake of José Martí, the one of the fathers of Cuban Independence.

59SL: How do you see the figure of Fidel Castro?

60SW: His personality was “out of the ordinary” and had a range of quite exceptional talents. Among contemporary statesmen, it is not so common to find an equivalent political figure who brings together so many facets and qualities in one man. He was a demanding intellectual, with a great curiosity of mind; his close relations with several Nobel Prize winners in literature testify to this. He also maintained links with spiritual authorities, including the last three popes who came to Cuba. He had forged strong and surprising links with John Paul II, when a priori everything seemed to oppose them.

61He was also a rebel, a revolutionary, a political and military strategist, admirer of Napoleon’s strategic genius. He was a seasoned fighter in various battles, in the Sierra Maestra, in the Bay of Pigs or indirectly in the battle of Cuito Cuanavale in Angola. It should be remembered that without Cuban military contribution in Angola, the fall of apartheid would probably not have been possible, hence this unwavering friendship with Nelson Mandela. Fidel Castro was also an incomparable strategist on the international stage, playing east-west power struggles, transcending north-south divides, such as the role he played in the Non-Aligned Movement.

62He was also a visionary in a number of areas such as ecology and the future of the planet. His famous speech at the Earth Summit in Rio in 1992 illustrates this. We should also note the very active role played by Cuban and French diplomacy to achieve success at the Paris Climate Change Conference in December 2015 (COP 21). He was also prescient about the demise of the USSR shortly after the Chernobyl nuclear disaster. Finally, he would also have predicted a Cuban-American rapprochement. In an ironic response to a question from an English journalist in an Argentinian newspaper in 1973, Fidel Castro is said to have replied with a prophetic joke: “The Americans will come to talk with us the day their president is black and there is a the South American pope”.

63It will be up to serious biographers and historians – with the necessary hindsight –to take stock of his action. As with any human work, it will obviously include its successes and failures, its shadows and its lights. It is also the characteristic of “great men” to be both adored and hated and to provoke passionate debates. But the factual observation of events, the time for reflection and putting into perspective should contrast with a lot of superficial analyses, clichés repeated over and over, a few easy stereotypes, a good dose of bad faith and often a very great deal of ignorance, alas.

64SL: In your opinion, what are the prospects for rapprochement between Cuba and the United States with the election of Joe Biden?

65SW: Joe Biden should in theory be back on Barack Obama’s path by the end of his term, with admittedly a probably different style and gesture and an approach marked by a generational difference. What complicates the exercise is that President Biden must first consolidate his Democratic camp, crossed by contradictory currents on the Cuban question and strengthen his positions in Congress even if he obtained a parliamentary majority, moreover, still fragile. In addition, he is confronted with two totally contradictory lobbies. On one side are the radical voices of the anti-Castro lobby, which remains a still powerful lobby. On the other, are the economic lobbies, those of the American Chamber of Commerce, the business community, the farmers of the Midwest who are pushing for the normalization of economic exchanges between the two countries. Note that the Latin American community in Florida voted overwhelmingly for Joe Biden in November 2020 even if, in the end, Donald Trump won Florida thanks to the votes of white and elderly Americans in this state.