Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Portland observer. (Portland, Or.) 1970-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 30, 1976)
Portland O bserver T hursday, Septem ber 30th, 1976 Cuba’s UN Mission wins friends by T . D . Allman (PNSI New York The cocktail party, held in the United Nation« enclave here, waa not an unuaual one Guesta included diplomat«, journaliata. university profes aora. officials of foundations and several of those chick, thirtyist women who are the diplomatic equivalents of snow bunnies. In one corner, two Cuban diplomat» were engaged in a heated argument. What was unusual was that they were arguing with each other, rather than with Americans. Whether the Cubans were aware of it or not, their amicable but lively debate had a highly favorable effect on the other guests. "I've visited many communist coun tries,” said one U.S. foreign policy ex pert, "and you just never see a pair of Russian or Chinese officials disagree with each other in public. I find the Cubans likeable and impressive." While United Nations membership is important to Cuba, Cuba's New York mission is absolutely vital to its growing dialogue with Americans •• a dialogue that is more lively than ever, despite the fact that the two countries have had no diplomatic relations for more than fifteen years. The objective of Cuba's diplomacy in New York is so clear that not even the Cubans themselves make any secret of it. Though the official course of U.S.-Cuban detente has been blocked following the Cuban military intervention in Angola, an unofficial, behind-the-scenes Cuban effort to promote renewed diplomatic relations is flourishing. From their UN mission, Cuban diplo mats armed with invitations to Havana have been seeking out Americans they believe will be influential policy makers after the presidential election, whoever wins. As » result, the trickle of important U.S. visitors to Cuba - including legisla tive assistants and members of the major northeastern universities, think tanks and foundations - has grown into a small stream. Several small air charter firms in Miami have even begun specializing in flying American visitors south across the Straits of Florida to Havana. The visitors tend to be personally con servative, even when they favor major liberalizations in U.S. foreign policy, and therefore their personal reactions are especially interesting. Most such visitors dislike the communist-style austerity of Cuba. But they are greatly impressed by Cuba's social accomplishments, and they remark again and again about the ab sence of secret policy, the lack of fear among Cubans, their friendliness and their frankness, even in political discus sions with foreigners. “For all its faults, I still would prefer a liberal democracy like Venezuela." said one such visitor, Robert Bond, who is a research fellow at New York's Council on Foreign Relations. But, he added, “if one is to choose between the dictatorship in Chile and the dictatorship in Cuba, I would prefer Cuba. Castro has not only given the people bread. He has given them dignity.’’ Even during the darkest days of the U.S.-Cuban confrontation, Americans and Cubans retained much in common for the simple reason that historically no other I^atin American country, not even Mexi co, has been so close to the United States. The expertise of Cuba's i America watchers clearly remains great and the Cubans seem correctly to have recog nized that they can only gain by giving Americans a largely unimpeded look at themselves and the socialist society they have built since Castro entered Havana in 1959. Why, nonetheless, are the Cubans so eager to re-establish diplomatic relations with a country which historically has ex ploited Cuba, and which, since 1960, has done everything from blockade the coun try to conspiring to have its national leader assassinated*? Both Americans and Cubans point out that it was never Cuba that broke off diplomatic relations with the United States, or withdrew from the Organiza tion of American States. Rather it was the U-S. which severed ties and at tempted to ostracize Cuba from inter American relations. "They are also terribly proud of what they have done," said another visitor to Cuba, Richard Haas, who is an American Rhodes Scholar and former legislative assistant to Senator Claiborne Pell. “Yet in spite of the total independence they now have from America, we are still terribly important to them. It is almost as though by re-establishing ties with Wash ington they would gain the final, ultimate legitimacy." Cuban officials frankly state that they would benefit from renewed trade ties with the U.S. and from access to Ameri can technology. And in return, high rank ing Cuban officials, in marathon conver sations with visiting Americans, have offered the possibility of what once were some unthinkable concessions. According to Americans recently re turning from Cuba, these include an end to the propaganda war with the U.S., some form of reconciliation with the Cuban exile community in America, which amounts to ten per cent of the entire Cuban population, an end to Cuban pressure at the UN and elsewhere for Puerto Rican independence and even dis cussing the question of compensation for nationalized U.S. holdings in Cuba. Cuban officials, while strongly defen ding the Angola intervention, state that it was a product of unique circumstances, among them Dr. Kissinger's own unwar- ranted hostility to the Ml’LA. They point out that they have counselled the government of Angola to establish diplo matic relations with all nations, including the U.S. And they express the hope that Dr. Kissinger's present African diplomacy will succeed to the extent that another Angola-type situation - and hence another need for Cuban intervention - will not arise again. The question cannot help posing itself: Is the Cuban eagerness for relations with the U.S. a function of the same dissatis faction with the Soviet Union that ulti mately has driven countries as diverse as Ghana, Egypt and China into better rela tions with Washington? Conservative American visitors to Cuba state that the Russian presence, while very important, is discreet, respectful of Cuban sovereignty and that in unusually frank discussions with Cubans no trace of irritation with the Soviet Union emerged. “Of course, they can never forget what Khrushchev did during the missile crisis,” one such American remarked. “But there also is the fact that Moscow itself favors Cuban U.S. detente." Both the Cuban mission in New York and the foreign ministry in Havana are watching the U.S. presidential election carefully, and have attempted in a low- key but consistent manner to build bridges to tho Carter camp. The Cuban effort already may have enjoyed some important successes. At a recent private but high-level meeting at the Center for Inter American Relations in New York, recent visitors to Havana discussed their experience. There was no apparent hostility to the idea of re-establishing relations with Cuba at the meeting. Indeed, the rtmos- phere was one of guarded but real optim ism that U.S.-Cuban relations sooner rather than later can be restored on a mutually respectful basis. Cuban officials privately say that they have no illusions that the road back to correct relations with the U.S. will be an easy one, whether Ford or Carter wins in November. And they correctly point out that U.S. concessions on the Panama Canal may complicate any eventual U.S.- Cuban rapprochement by making either Ford or Carter even more reluctant to permit an eventual return of the U.S. Guantanamo base to Cuban sovereignty. But the Cubans are equally convinced that their patient, low key good neighbor policy toward individual members of the U.S. foreign policy community is success fully building a domestic appreciation of Cuba's accomplishments, and friendly in tentions, that no administration in Wash ington will be able to ignore forever. (PNS) - The booming export of U.S. nuclear technology - only a decade ago the most tightly controlled technology in the world -• is stirring mounting Con gressional resistance to what critics view as dangerously loose government con trols on nuclear exports. Some fear that the high profitability of nuclear export coupled with the precar ious financial state of the industry has locked both the State Department and private companies into an escalating nu clear export race. The key concern, reflected in recent amendments to eTifgy bills pending be fore Congress, is the unfettered sale of nuclear material to nations that do not accept international safeguards. At least 41 countries have now elected to go nuclear, up from 32 just two years ago. The three newest members of the nuclear club are Indonesia, Poland and Turkey. According to the recently released an nual report of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, 20 countries are now capable of buiilding crude but effec tive nuclear explosives from the spent fuel of nuclear power plants. Nearly twice that many will have stockpiled enough plutonium from nuclear plants to build atomic bombs during the next decade. In addition, the Geneva based Interna tional Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a UN group, now proposes to scatter nu clear fuel recycling centers which yield deadly plutonium - around the world to serve the 454 reactors now operating or planned outside the U.S. Yet only one-third cf the current nu clear nations now observe the IAEA safe guards against malfunctions, sabotage or theft, and most are not members of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty INPT), which bans development of nuclear wea pons. Said President Ford in his recent arms control address to Congress, "A world of many nuclear weapons states could be come extremely unstable and danger ous." But despite the acknowledgement, the administration and the nuclear industry have resisted current congressional ef forts aimed at limiting nuclear exports. Those proposals, sponsored by Senator Stuart Symington (D., Mo.) and Repre sentative John Anderson (r„ III.), would, among other things: •Entitle Congress to approve or disap prove all nuclear export licenses to coun tries that have not signed the Non Proli feration Treaty: •Insist that all U.S. nuclear customers adhere to IAEA safeguards; •Ban military aid to countries supply ing or receiving nucleasr technology un less both countries were party to interna tional safeguards agreements. i ONE DAY SERVICE you kn o w M iaor Repairs - Na Charge Pick up A Delivery V A R IE T IE S y o u lik e * N » • h • 1 8 , • • 11 .t» , » I • M iW H tk -------- _ J t — ,1 ju W * --« 4», * * I . fc . I ’ M . I ‘ H a . Of U N IU .D C R O ttH S $100-$100,000 $500 $999 99 $1,000 $100.000 $1.000-$100.000 — V LENGTH OF CERTIFICATE 30 to 89 days 90 days to 1 yr 1 yr. to 2Vi yrs. 2 l/ i yrs. to 4 yrs 4 yrs. to 6 yrs. 4 yrs to 6 yrs. 6 yrs thru 8 yrs. t i * - r I INTEREST RATE 5% M i» 6% 6H » 6H% 7K% 714» Ask about the Sock Certificate at any branch of U.S. Bank (while the supply on hand lasts). And get your savings game off on the right foot. The Sock Certifícate only at BANK •All interest rates quoted are based on those effective Sept. 15,1976 at United States National Bank of Oregon and are subject to change at any time. All interest rates are per annum rates. Federal law and regulation prohibit payment of a time deposit prior to maturity unless three months' interest thereon is forfeited and the interest on the amount withdrawn is reduced to regular savings rate. Register and ft could mean the difference Jimmy Carter and Gerald F o n t ((T o o many have had to suffer at the hands of a political and economic elite who have shaped decisions and never had to account for mistakes nor to suffer from injustice. When unemployment prevails, they never stand in line looking for a job. When depri vation results from a confused welfare system. they never do without food or cloth/ j or a place to sleep. When the public schocis are inferior or torn by strife, their children go to exclusive private schools.» Jim m y Carter made that statement when he accepted the Democratic nom ina tion for President. If it hadn't been for Black support, Jim m y Carter would never have gotten that far. For it was Blacks who put Jim m y Carter over the top in the Democratic pri maries. Because he understands our needs. And because he’ll do something about a government that ignores them. Now we have a chance to make a differ ence again. In the general election Novem ber 2nd. It can mean the difference be tween politics as usual or real leadership for a change. We can d rift along w ith an economy th a t’s choking the working people of this country. O r we can elect Jim m y C arter—a leader who w ill check inflation and put America back to w ork again. We can continue w ith a lack of justice in this country. Or we can elect Jim m y Carter 282-8361 S IZ E S y o u w a n t The Friendlie«» Store« In Town] 'Since 190» “We've built such a huge nuclear com plex, with so much capital and so many jobs dependent on it,” said Long, "that now people are willing to say that the destruction of the world is inevitable and wc should relax and make money on it." The impart of nuclear exports on the U.S. balance of payments is suggested by figures from the U.S. Export-Import Bank, which finances foreign purchases of U.S. goods and helps thq Nuclear Regu latory Commission judge the merits of nuclear export license applications. NORTH A N X PORTLAND ' FOR AMOUNT OF CERTIFICATE During July hearings before the Nu clear Regulatory Commission on a pro posed 13-ton shipment of enriched urani um to India, a non-NPT member. Rep. Clarence Long (D., Md.) charged that dollars - not safety considerations - were dictating U.S. nuclear policy. PORTLAND CLEANING WORKS lENOW 'S BRANDS tic considerations. The State Depart ment, for instance, would be restricted from using nuclear technology as a dip lomatic plum, as in the 1974 agreement to sell reactors to Egypt and Israel, neither of which are members of the NPT. Equally important is the economic angle: Nuclear sales abroad promise huge revenues at home, fast approaching the level of U.S. arms sales abroad. The bank's projected outlay for coun tries buying U.S. nuclear technology over the five-year period ending in 1978 totals The Economic Factor $11 billion its largest single loan rate gory. Administration resistance to such pro Many of those loans went to poor, posals stems from economic and diploma (Please turn to p. 4 col. 1) SHO P If you’ve got $100 or more socked away someplace, we’ve got a new idea that holds a great deal of interest for you. The Sock Certificate, It’s a genuine savings certificate that lets you save from $100 to $100,000 at very handsome interest rates* To be specific: Copyright PNS, 1976 Congress tries to limit nuclear export race by Jack Saunders Step into a higher interest rate. KNIT BLOCKING OUR SPECIALTY 3 9 6 6 N. WNNema Ave. N. A lexander, Proprietor Pa»d for and a u t h o r i s e d b y 1 976 Dem ocratic Pre»»dentiat C a m p aig n Com m W taa, Inc —a leader who doesn’t thin k big shot crooks should go free »» while the poor ones go to jail. We can suffer through a welfare sys tem th a t’s bloated and confused. Or we can elect Jim m y Carter— a leader who w ill straighten out the welfare system and make it fair. We can struggle w ith a government that does nothing to help the cities. Or we can elect Jim m y Carter—a leader who w ill move to relieve an unemployment rate among Blacks that approaches 17%. We can continue to have a government that caters to the special interests, the powerful and the privileged. Or we can have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. A government led by Jim m y Carter and Walter Mondale. It can’t happen w itho ut your help. That’s why it’s so im portant for you to register. And to vote Democratic.
