Cuba and the OAS
By Greta Levy
June 24, 2009
Listen to an audio recording of this event.
The recent OAS decision to reverse the 1962 provision that expelled Cuba was historic, said Secretary General José Miguel Insulza. But “how historic it will be, depends on what Cuba is willing to do and what other countries are willing to accept.”
The provision agreed to at the 39th General Assembly of the OAS in Honduras last month allows for Cuba’s eventual readmission, provided Havana approaches the OAS in the spirit of the “practices, purposes, and principles” embodied in that institution.
At a June 24 conversation sponsored by the Inter-American Dialogue, Insulza explained that the language of the resolution means that for Cuba “the lock is off” but “the door is not open.”
The resolution was directed at Cuba, Insulza said, but it also shows the Obama administration’s interest in stronger engagement and cooperation with other Latin American countries. The U.S. role in the resolution is a sign of commitment to Latin America and its leaders, Insulza explained, and from the standpoint of the OAS, “everybody is willing to engage them in this dialogue.”
Beyond a dialogue with Cuba, the Secretary General foresees complications in official activities taking place as long as Cuba does not return to full membership. Though he is “in favor of moving in a very progressive way,” issues remain in spending OAS resources on projects that might involve Cuba due to the U.S. embargo on trade and travel with the island.
Since all member states contribute financially to the OAS, restrictive U.S. laws such as the Helms-Burton Act of 1996 tie the organization’s purse-strings insofar as Cuba is concerned.
Insulza addressed the fact that member countries have very different priorities and concerns in their relations to Cuba, but also added “Interestingly, everyone seemed to think that this was a great resolution.” There is ongoing vigilance however, as to how to interpret the rather vague resolution and anticipate its possible after-effects.
Insulza said that the OAS did not wish to “replace the lock with a brand new lock” by including specific criteria for re-admittance and thereby phrased the resolution “as wide as you could put it.” However, Insulza did clarify that Cuba will only be a full member “as long as it is willing to have the same rights and responsibilities as other countries.”
Another topic of particular interest was whether the decision to invite Cuba back to full membership would threaten the Organization itself. On this point, Insulza seemed confident, saying “everybody wants Cuba back, but not at the cost of the OAS.” The decision to allow Cuba’s reinstatement came only after a vote as to whether the decision should come from consensus—as is the norm at the General Assembly—or be put to a vote. Despite the fact that “everybody wanted to do something about Cuba…but nobody knew what to do,” they spent weeks drafting possible resolutions that could reach consensus, and “they avoided the vote explicitly.”
The Secretary General made clear that whatever future role Cuba takes on within the OAS, “there are not going to be any dramatic situations,” but rather numerous bilateral talks likely to play out over the next few months. The accomplishment of the General Assembly in Honduras was in “eliminating completely” a 47-year exclusion, Insulza said. “But now it’s up to Cuba.”