By Carlos Alzugaray Treto

 When President Barack Obama’s visit was announced on March 21 and 22, Cuba and the United States made another step of undeniable political and historic significance into the process which should lead towards the normalization of relations. Let’s remember that in diplomatic terms a visit by a Head of State is considered as a sign of the high level achieved by both sides in the existing ties.

It turns out to be paradoxical, however, that this visit takes place even when the great obstacles still to be overcome have not been publicly defined, not even in general terms. Discussing about normalization would imply the lifting of the blockade. The stop of subversive activities which make part of the punitive and hostile policy for a change of regime, the elimination of the Cuban Adjustment Act, the return to Cuba of the territory illegally occupied by Guantánamo Naval Base and the mutually acceptable solution of the financial claims for damage and nationalizations both sides have with respect to the other.

Nonetheless this evident contradiction, the initiative coincide with the intensity of diplomatic exchange and cooperation which have been produced in some areas since last December 17, 2014: Cuba outing from the list of states sponsors of terrorism; the reestablishment of diplomatic relations; the reopening of Embassies; cooperation in international multi-lateral and regional topics; mutual aid in the face of common challenges in terms of security; solution of two key topics which promote exchange between the two countries, the reestablishment of the mail service and the signing of an agreement for the normalization of relations in civil aviation; and the decisive steps for turning the existing non-governmental environmental cooperation in processes  resolutely supported by both governments.

In the brief fourteen-month period many high-level contacts have been made: two presidential summits followed by two phone conversations; four members of Obama President’s Cabinet came to Havana and two Cuban Ministers went to Washington; trips around Cuba were staged by governors from New York, Virginia, Texas and Arkansas (two Democrats and two Republicans); visit and high-level exchange between the United States’ Homeland Security Department and Cuba’s Ministry of Interior; many delegations of bipartisan parliamentarians with presence in Cuba; implementation of two meetings by a bi-national commission of high-level experts with the aim of getting acquainted with each other to work jointly on pending issues, particularly those related to blockade; and also meetings with working parties about concrete topics ranging between human rights and cybersecurity.

However, it is worth to mention that, with the implementation of agreements on civil aviation in the wings, there are quite little advances in economic, commercial and financial matters.

Not even the announcement by the Treasury Department that American banks are allowed to open accounts in Cuban banks and that American citizens travelling to Cuba legally may use their credit cards here have come into fruition.

The illegal unilateral blockade, embargo or economic sanctions –as the reader prefers to name it- is “the elephant inside the room” hampering the advance toward irreversible changes which both governments pursue and will make up the solid grounds of a normalization process.

In September 2015 President Raúl Castro attended a reception offered by President Barack Obama to the Heads of State and Governments who took part at the events organized by the UN.

Sometimes I wonder with what other country Cuba and the United States maintain such an intense inter-governmental and diplomatic exchange. It is really hard to find one. It’s natural that after so many years of distancing, as a result of the American policy, both governments need to negotiate and discuss over everything which affects each other. After all we are close neighbors.

The truth is that Obama’s policy contrasts thoroughly with the old habits held by George Bush’s envoys in Cuba, who blatantly ignored the Cuban government to concentrate their exchange with dissident groups.

This visit is therefore, framed within the open strategy of both governments aimed at consolidating the changes for making them irreversible in the process of normalization of relations and the reestablishment of diplomatic relations. This is particularly important given the fact that President Obama has little time in office left and there is a huge uncertainty about the election results in the United States, in which a candidate who might overturn the process can be elected.

Cuba stands out for the seriousness shown in facing this process full of opportunities but also challenges. It is the result of intelligent and audacious diplomacy in which the principles of our foreign policy are combined with our national interests. It also means an opportunity for President Obama to keep making decisions which help dismantle the blockade; at least this has been suggested by National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes, main negotiator of the secret segment of exchanges which became the historic agreements of December 17, 2014. Obama is not expected to come empty handed.

It’s the American President’s coda for a diplomatic initiative which will make part of his legacy. In the context of soft power or smart power, Cuba is ideal as it is a smaller neighboring country with great international prestige. This initiative has been welcomed in the world political field, including its main allies and especially in the region.

In the domestic stage the topic of Cuba has evolved positively as the recent Gallup poll showed. Over 50% Americans have a good view of Cuba. Therefore, it is not a risk for the President in this field, neither for the nominee representing his party in the presidential elections next November. The President could have postponed his visit for the period stretching between elections and his departure from the Oval Office. That was politically less risky but also completely ineffective in the attempt to promoting the improvement of relations.

Let’s not forget that there is a change in the electoral context. In the past, candidates competed for adopting the hardest position against Cuba since there was the perception that it was the net profit in terms of financial support and votes, particularly for the Cuban American community. This is not happening any more. With a softer position Obama won twice over his opponents. In 2008 he did it with the 30% Cuban American support and the 49% in 2012. Both times he won in Florida. Republican candidates will criticize him but this is predictable, they will do that cautiously since the topic has not the same characteristic it used to have.

The recent visit to Washington made by Cuba’s Foreign Trade and Investment Minister Rodrigo Malmierca at the forefront of a delegation of Cuban senior officials, in which an intense official and business activity took place and the signing in Havana of the civil aviation agreement indicate a clear political willingness to advance toward the lifting of the blockade. Evidently, these important activities proved that important businessmen in the United States support the President’s initiative with Cuba.

The news has not been necessarily accepted with full joy by many Cubans. Some keep seeing signs of mischievous subversive intentions behind any initiative coming from Washington. Obama’s visit is associated with an “open declaration of cultural warfare”, or a “new attempt for colonization”. Many signs shown by President Obama are pointing to that. However, there are doubts whether these are rhetorical turns aimed at some political sectors in the United States. That question could remain until next January 2017, when the winning candidate of November 2016 elections takes office.

In that context would be convenient that some advisor remind Obama that his actions in Cuba, which will be carefully observed, are directed toward the Cuban people, who strongly reject any interference in their inner affairs. Cubans have made huge sacrifices to live a moment like this and nobody, not even President Obama, whose merits, should not be either ignored, can expect to subvert with beautified words what we have achieved.

When he has referred to Cuba, the President often recalls that we should not be clung to the past. Let’s turn the page and move forward, as he suggests, but let’s not forget the great American Philosopher George Santayana’s words: “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”