Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Cuba

21. UN Human Rights Council Elections for 2021-2023 and the Responsibility to Protect

Author:
Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Abstract:
Today, 13 October, the UN General Assembly elected Bolivia, China, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, France, Gabon, Malawi, Mexico, Nepal, Pakistan, Russia, Senegal, Ukraine, United Kingdom and Uzbekistan to the Human Rights Council (HRC) for the 2021-2023 term. With the elections of Côte d’Ivoire, France, Mexico, Senegal and United Kingdom, 16 of the 47 Council members during 2021 will also be members of the Group of Friends of the Responsibility to Protect in Geneva. The Human Rights Council and its mechanisms – including the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), special procedures and treaty bodies, as well as the technical assistance provided by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) – all play an essential role in providing early warning of the risk factors that can lead to crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and genocide.
Topic:
Human Rights, United Nations, Elections, Responsibility to Protect (R2P), and UN Human Rights Council (HRC)
Political Geography:
Pakistan, Russia, China, United Kingdom, Ukraine, France, Uzbekistan, Cuba, Nepal, Mexico, Senegal, Bolivia, Malawi, Côte d'Ivoire, Global Focus, and Gabon

22. Cuba’s voting pattern during its 12 years at the UN Human Rights Council

Author:
Brian Schapira and Roxana Perel
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America (CADAL)
Abstract:
Over the twelve years during which Cuba had a seat at the UN Human Rights Council, the regime has been systematically complicit in the grave human rights violations perpetrated in other parts of the world. This can be inferred from the recorded votes, opposing to resolutions condemning dire human rights violations and calling the world into action. They have been constantly abetting and siding with autocratic governments across the world. In the bid to join the Human Rights Council during the 2021-2023 term, the one-party system stated that «should Cuba be elected to the Human Rights Council, it would continue to support its long-standing initiatives». Global democracies, especially those in Latin America who strive to consolidate the respect for human rights, shall oppose to the candidacy of Cuba and any other autocracies to the Human Rights Council, and they must do so publicly and actively in order to avoid the weakening of the International system for human rights protection.
Topic:
Human Rights, United Nations, UN Human Rights Council (HRC), and Human Rights Violations
Political Geography:
Cuba and Global Focus

23. BTI and Cuba: the State of democratic denial

Author:
Manuel Cuesta Morúa
Publication Date:
06-2020
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Center for the Opening and Development of Latin America (CADAL)
Abstract:
Compared with other reports on Cuba, the Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) has several noticeable advantages. The first is that it is a comprehensive report, embedded in three pillars: economics, politics and governance. The second is that it captures trends, whereas more reports are static. The third is that it considers themes through indicators, which most reports ignore. And as it is issued every two years it makes it possible to know the consistency (or lack, thereof) of the transformation and its rhythm. The following up. Has Cuba been transformed in 14 years (2006-2020)? Reading the report, it can be concluded that it has, whilst a new concept is introduced: that of static transformation –a sample of changes that leave the structures of a society intact.
Topic:
Human Rights, Governance, Authoritarianism, Democracy, Society, and Human Rights Violations
Political Geography:
Cuba, Latin America, and Global Focus

24. On Sovereignties and Solidarities

Author:
Julio César Guanche Zaldívar and Sara Kozameh
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA)
Abstract:
The United States must abandon Cold War-era foreign policies and accept that Cuba is a sovereign nation free to define its political future— even if that means continuing socialism.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Cold War, Sovereignty, Socialism/Marxism, and Capitalism
Political Geography:
United States and Cuba

25. Potential Reserve Army and Diverging Paths of Transition in Former State Socialist Economies

Author:
Zhun Xu
Publication Date:
08-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Political Economy Research Institute (PERI), University of Massachusetts Amherst
Abstract:
Since the rise of neoliberalism in the world in the last quarter of the 20th century, many former state socialist economies also started their transition into different kinds of market economic models. Over the course of the last three decades or so, there emerged distinct paths of transition among these economies. This paper proposes a Marxian framework to help understand the three major models of transitions among former socialist economies: the Russian path, the Chinese path, and the Cuban/North Korean path. The framework focuses on the differences in working class composition and in particular the size of the potential reserve army in these socialist economies. An examination of the historical process of market reforms in former state socialist economies suggests that a sizable potential reserve army could give rise to a gradual approach to neoliberal transition while a negligible potential reserve army could lead to either a shock therapy or a long impasse.
Topic:
Political Economy, Neoliberalism, Socialism, and Market Economy
Political Geography:
Russia, China, North Korea, and Cuba

26. CoronaShock and Socialism

Author:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Publication Date:
02-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research
Abstract:
In late December 2019, the Wuhan Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in central China’s Hubei Province detected cases of pneumonia of an unknown cause. In the first few days of January 2020, Chinese authorities were regularly informing the World Health Organisation (WHO) as well as other major countries and regions with close ties to China’s mainland, such as Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan about the outbreak. On 5 January, the WHO released its first briefing on a ‘pneumonia of unknown cause’ in Wuhan. Little was known about the virus, neither how to properly understand it nor whether transmission could occur between humans. The genome sequence for the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) was published by the Global Initiative on Sharing All Influenza Data (GISAID) on 12 January. Dr. Zhong Nanshan, a leading Chinese pulmonologist who is advising the Chinese government on this pandemic, confirmed human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus on 20 January. As soon as it was clear that this virus could be transmitted between humans, the Chinese authorities acted. Wuhan, a city of 11 million people, was shut down, the scientific establishment in China – and its collaborators around the world – went to work to understand the virus and the disease (COVID-19), and medical personnel in China rushed to be trained and to help break the chain of the infection. Inside Wuhan, the neighbourhood committees, which include members of a range of other associations, Communist Party cadres, and volunteers of all kinds, hastened to assist with temperature checks, food and medicine distribution, and assistance in hospitals. After ten weeks in lockdown, Wuhan opened once more on 8 April. On 15 May, the authorities started to test all the residents of Wuhan once again in order to protect public health and to resume social and economic activities (China shared the results of this test to aid with studies on the feasibility of the herd immunity theory). On 30 January, WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared that the outbreak constitutes a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). From its Geneva headquarters, the WHO sent up a flare which effectively read: a highly contagious virus has been detected that requires stringent measures of tests, physical distance, and aggressive sanitation. At this point, in the aftermath of 20 January, a gulf opened between the capitalist states and the socialist states. Our analysis shows four main areas of differentiation between the socialist and capitalist approach to the virus. The socialist approach is based on: Science-based government action Public sector production of essential materials Public action mobilised to facilitate social life Internationalism In the capitalist states (such as the United States, Brazil, and India), the governments have instead operated in a hallucinatory manner, pretending that the virus is either not real or not contagious and hoping that some extraneous factor would protect their citizens from its dangers. For-profit sector firms have failed to provide the necessary equipment, while public action has been hard to galvanise in atomised societies that lack the habit of organisation and struggle. Finally, to cover up their incompetence, the ruling political class in these states has resorted to stigmatisation and jingoism, using – in this case – the lethal combination of racism and anti-communism to blame China. In this report, we look at three countries (Cuba, Venezuela, and Vietnam) as well as one state (Kerala, India) to investigate how these socialist parts of the world have been able to handle the virus more effectively.
Topic:
Governance, Capitalism, Pandemic, COVID-19, and Socialism
Political Geography:
India, Asia, Brazil, Vietnam, South America, Cuba, Caribbean, Venezuela, North America, and United States of America

27. Factsheet: The History and Evolution of Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, located in Cuba, was chosen as the site of a detention center due to its uncertain legal status—allowing the U.S. government to argue that those detained at the base were not entitled to certain rights under U.S. laws. The prison at the base consists of several distinct camps, each with differing security levels, transparency, and categories of detainees. Former President Barack Obama promised to close the prison but failed to do so. Former President Donald Trump pledged to not only keep the prison open but fill it with more detainees. Current President Joe Biden has promised to shut down the military prison.
Topic:
Prisons/Penal Systems, War on Terror, Detention, and Guantanamo Bay
Political Geography:
Cuba, North America, and United States of America

28. Factsheet: The Human Cost of Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
Guantánamo Bay military prison is a site of egregious and ongoing human rights violations perpetrated by the United States government. Opened in early 2002 on a U.S. naval base in Cuba, the prison has housed 780 adults and minors from around the world—all Muslim—most of whom have been subjected to torture and severe abuse at the hands of the U.S. armed forces and the CIA. Most were never formally charged with any crime and were detained for years without trial. As of 2022, thirty-nine remain imprisoned at Guantánamo Bay prison.
Topic:
Human Rights, Torture, Prisons/Penal Systems, War on Terror, Guantanamo Bay, and Arbitrary Detentions
Political Geography:
Cuba, North America, and United States of America

29. Factsheet: Legal Challenges to Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
U.S. legislation and case law have both upheld and challenged the legal authority of the Guantánamo Bay military prison. This includes the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) and the Military Commissions Act of 2006, as well as Supreme Court cases such as Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) and Boumediene v. Bush (2008). Serious legal issues have arisen around the legal rights and protections of those imprisoned, including the right to habeas corpus and the right to be tried under the U.S. legal system (as opposed to U.S. military tribunals). Attorneys for those imprisoned at Guantánamo Bay military prison have been subjected to surveillance and interference by the U.S. government, and the U.S. government tightly controls the release of information about the military prison and those imprisoned there.
Topic:
Human Rights, Law, Guantanamo Bay, and Habeas Corpus
Political Geography:
Cuba, United States of America, and Guantanamo

30. Factsheet: Torture at Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp

Author:
Bridge Initiative Team
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Bridge Initiative, Georgetown University
Abstract:
A majority of those imprisoned at the Guantánamo Bay Detention Camp were subjected to various forms of physical and psychological abuse—techniques that were developed by two American psychologists contracted by the CIA to develop its torture program. The torture included but was not limited to waterboarding, sexual harassment and abuse, physical abuse, and sleep deprivation. Those formerly imprisoned still experience physical and psychological distress and trauma as a result of their treatment in Guantánamo Bay. A 2014 U.S. Senate intelligence report found the torture program was ineffective in its stated goal of obtaining military intelligence.
Topic:
Human Rights, Torture, Trauma, and Guantanamo Bay
Political Geography:
Cuba, United States of America, and Guantanamo