Recognition of Cuba!

The big news this week is President Obama's announcement that diplomatic relations will be restored with Cuba.  See his full speech here.  This move was long overdue, and it's a measure of Obama's pragmatism that he was the president to finally end an outmoded strategy that had stopped serving  the interests of both the United States and the Cuban people decades ago.  Further, it's another example of the president making good on his stated resolve to take all the steps he unilaterally can under his constitutional executive powers to make progress on solving any number of festering national problems.

After four years of futilely seeking common ground with the congressional Republican majority, it's ironic that GOP victory in the 2014 midterms has released Obama from political concerns and freed him to do what is right in the humanitarian and national interest.  First came his groundbreaking agreement with China on reducing greenhouse gas emissions, next was his  Executive Order on immigration enforcement, and now comes recognition of Cuba.  That is something congress can do nothing about, though they alone can remove the economic sanctions still in place against the island nation. 

The diplomatic recognition follows the formula laid out over 190 years ago in the Monroe Doctrine, that in dealing with foreign powers the United States will "consider the government de facto as the legitimate government for us..."  Thus diplomatic recognition is not a "reward" bestowed on governments we approve of, it is a recognition of the facts of political life.  It is also a bow to the reality that we can have no influence over a nation with which we have no relations.  It is a childish notion indeed that we can hold our breath and stop speaking to a government and that they then will capitulate to all our wishes.  It hasn't worked for 53 years, and dead-enders who want to continue the policy do so reflexively, with no serious way forward in prospect.  Indeed, the history of our relations with the Soviet Union, Vietnam, China and others, give every indication that establishing relations with former adversaries and increasing their contacts with American people and commerce accelerate changes for the good in such closed societies. 

The ability to keep nine exploratory sessions so secret with Cuba is a marvel in today's media climate, involving as they did not only the U.S. and Cuba but also the good offices of Canada and the Vatican.  One wonders what other remarkable and long-needed initiatives the Obama Administration may have in store.  I'm betting there are more, and that most of them will inspire apoplexy among congressional Republicans.  That will make them all the more delightful.   
         

Man Wants to Keep his Sons Alive

Lawrence Otis Graham is an attorney with an investment banker wife and two sons.  They both went to Harvard.  After the Trayvon Martin shooting and the other recent killings of young unarmed black men, Lawrence decided he had better have "the talk" with his two sons to make sure they know the unwritten rules of American society, the rules that young black men need to follow if they want to reduce their chances of getting killed by jittery policemen, security guards or just plain average white citizens.

Graham was interviewed on Nightline recently to share about the precautions an aware black male feels obligated to take to avoid profiling.  He's not over the top; it's just matter of fact advice.  Click on this link to hear his explanation of what he felt he needed to tell his boys about dress and behavior.  It only take two minutes and sixteen seconds.  His goal is simple.  He says, "I just want to keep them alive."     

                                 The Graham Family

Senate Report: Torture was Brutal and Ineffective

 Today the Senate Intelligence Committee chaired by Senator Dianne Feinstein released the unclassified version of its report on "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques" used during the Bush Administration.  A detailed synopsis of the more brutal methods can be found here.  Suffice it to say some of the techniques employed killed detainees and many would constitute torture by the definitions of the Geneva Convention, of which the United States is a signatory.  The report also finds that CIA lied to Congress about the methods employed and the effectiveness of the intelligence obtained.  The report's investigation determined that no important actionable intelligence was garnered by the use of these barbaric practices, and that indeed much misinformation was "fabricated" by detainees in their efforts to make the agony stop.  One of President Obama's first acts after his inauguration in 2009 was to ban this barbarism. 

 Senate majority leader Harry Reid weighed in to back the report. “Today, for the first time, the American people are going to learn the full truth about torture that took place under the CIA during the Bush administration,” Reid said on the Senate floor. “The only way our country can put this episode in the past is to confront what happened.”  "Not only is torture wrong but it doesn’t work,” said Reid. He said torture “got us nothing except a bad name.”

Most Republicans, including former President George W. Bush, criticized the report, but Senator John McCain, a victim of torture himself as a prisoner in Vietnam, had this to say: "What might cause a surprise not just to our enemies, but to many Americans is how little these practices did to aid our efforts to bring 9/11 culprits to justice and to find and prevent terrorist attacks today and tomorrow. That could be a real surprise since it contradicts the many assurances provided by intelligence officials on the record and in private that enhanced interrogation techniques were indispensable in the war against terrorism." (Source)

I don't always agree with Sen. McCain on many things, but on this issue he has always had it right.  He well encapsulated the importance of a moral stance with this statement: "But in the end, torture's failure to serve its intended purpose isn't the main reason to oppose its use. I have often said and will always maintain that this question isn't about our enemies, it's about us. It's about who we were, who we are and who we aspire to be." (Source)