Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - January 30, 2025, Winnipeg, Manitoba THINK TANK COMMENT EDITOR: RUSSELL WANGERSKY 204-697-7269 ● RUSSELL.WANGERSKY@WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM A7 THURSDAY JANUARY 30, 2025 Ideas, Issues, Insights Deciphering Joe Biden’s last-ditch Cuba measures I N the last days before Joe Biden departed the White House, he was somehow persuaded to take a second look at the U.S.-Cuba relation- ship. All I can say to former president Biden is: that was one long Cuba policy review given that it was initiated in February 2021. Interestingly, it was very reminiscent of Presi- dent Donald Trump’s dying days of his first term, when he circumvented U.S. State Department protocols in mid-January 2021 and unilateral- ly declared the Cuban government a state that sponsored international terrorism. Essentially, it was Trump’s final parting shot to remind Cu- ban-American voters in Florida of his anti-Cuba bona fides. Biden, for his part, reversed Trump’s last-min- ute move by undertaking his own 11th-hour deci- sion to remove Cuba from the state department’s list of countries (which now includes Syria, North Korea and Iran) which sponsor terrorist activ- ities. For all intents and purposes, taking Cuba off the list terminates U.S. financial sanctions against the country and opens up the possibility for Havana to access loans from major banks. But let’s be clear about one thing: Cuba does not in any way, shape or form engage in state-spon- sored terrorism. There’s no credible evidence that exists to validate such a charge. And no one seri- ously believes that former Colombian guerrillas now living in Cuba (since Havana was working as a mediator to bring peace to violence-plagued Co- lombia) or fugitives from U.S. justice (who were implicated in U.S., and not international, acts of political violence) have their fingerprints on any recent acts of terror. As Cuba specialist William LeoGrande of American University told the New York Times: “The statute that creates the terrorism list specifies giving material support to terrorists or harbouring terrorists who are actively engaged in terrorism while you are harbouring them. Cuba just hasn’t done those things.” The one country, though, that has engaged in terrorist activities is the U.S. itself; and those acts have been directly targeted at Cuba. From outright invasion to planned sabotage and then some — including poisoning livestock, setting off explosives at Cuban hotels and even orchestrating hundreds of assassination attempts. In addition to removing Cuba’s name from the terror list, Biden reversed Trump’s earlier sanctions against the Cuban Armed Forces, espe- cially those senior members involved in running tourist hotels on the island. Lastly, he announced that he had signed the temporary presidential waiver (for six months) for the Title III provisions of the anti-Cuba Helms-Burton Law that allows Cuban-Americans to sue for damages involving alleged “trafficking” in stolen Cuban property. In return, the Cubans agreed to gradually release over 550 protesters involved in the July 2021 islandwide demonstrations over widespread shortages and electrical interruptions in Cuba. The Cuban foreign ministry released the follow- ing statement: “The releases are carried out on the basis of a careful analysis based on the dif- ferent modalities contemplated by the legislation, and as part of the fair and humanitarian nature of Cuba’s penal and penitentiary systems.” One of those released initially was Cuban oppo- sition leader José Daniel Ferrer, who was arrested after participating in the 2021 anti-government protests. In an interview with the Miami Herald, he intoned: “dxscdcfI feel pretty good despite having spent years in truly terrible conditions, suffering beatings, extreme situations, illnesses and isolation.” Of course, there’s lots of speculation about why Biden would make these moves with so little time left in his presidency. It may be about his presidential legacy or it may very well have been his inclination all along to move away from punishing Cuba, though he demurred in hopes of winning Florida’s 30 electoral college votes. But in the wake of the November presidential election outcome, which showed that the Latino vote went overwhelmingly to Trump, perhaps he felt that he could deviate somewhat from what was largely four years of an ill-defined Cuba policy. There are those who also believe that Pope Francis and Catholic church officials in Cuba, who were urging Biden to reverse course to facilitate a substantial release of Cuban prisoners, were key players. Others point to reports that various government leaders, including Colombia’s Gustavo Petro, Bra- zil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Mexico’s former president Andrés Manuel López Obrador and Spain’s Pedro Sánchez, who all impressed upon the U.S. president the importance of loosening the economic vice on the Cuban people. Indeed, Karine Jean-Pierre, Biden’s White House press secretary, maintained that Biden’s decision was influenced by the “wisdom and counsel that has been provided to him by many world leaders, es- pecially in Latin America, who have encouraged him to take these actions, on how best to advance the human rights of the Cuban people.” Still, Biden’s surprising embrace of former president Barack Obama’s 2014 opening of a “new chapter” in U.S.-Cuba relations is, I suppose, better late than never. Unfortunately, all of these measures are eventually going to be re-imposed on the Cuban government by the Trump White House. So, when exactly did the Cold War end again? Peter McKenna is professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown. Safeguarding Manitoba’s natural legacy for the future FOR generations, Manitobans have found great meaning in the lands and waters that shape our province. The golden prairies stretching beneath endless skies, the deep boreal forests humming with life, and the quiet, steady flow of our rivers are more than just landscapes — they are part of our identi- ty. Families gather at remote lakeshores to cast their lines at dawn, hunters walk familiar trails that have been passed down for centuries and paddlers glide through still waters that have car- ried stories for millennia. Our natural areas provide not only sustenance but also solace, recreation and connection. They also provide spaces for hunting, gathering and angling. Ensuring enough of these areas remain intact is a shared responsibility to preserve nature and maintain places for people to enjoy the outdoor activities they love. Manitoba’s commit- ment to protect 30 per cent of its lands and waters by 2030 (30x30) aims to move the needle forward on establishing a balance of conservation and extractive developments such as forestry and mining in our province. This commitment reflects the voices of thousands of Manitobans who have expressed overwhelming support through more than 30,000 letters and emails urging the government to fulfil its 30x30 pledge. Manitoba faces urgent challenges that endanger both its natural heritage and the well-being of its communities. Habitat loss, climate change, and landscape-altering developments are degrading ecosystems. Wetlands are being drained, forests are being cut and waterways are threatened by pollution. These changes cause concern for wild- life and the communities that depend on healthy ecosystems for clean water, reliable resources and sustainable livelihoods. Ignoring these threats puts Manitoba’s tradi- tions, economy and environment at risk, creating much uncertainty for future generations. At the same time, Manitoba’s industries supply essential resources to Manitobans and the world. Conserva- tion and development must be balanced to ensure a sustainable future. Well-designed protected areas offer a fair and forward-looking approach to addressing these threats while respecting the needs of communi- ties. By conserving critical habitats, protected areas help maintain healthy ecosystems, support wildlife, mitigate climate change and provide clean air and water. Protected areas also foster community resil- ience and reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples and the natural world. Indigenous-led conser- vation initiatives, like the Conservation Areas Initiative in southeastern Interlake, highlight how conserving natural lands and waters can be inclusive by listening to and accommodating outdoor enthusiasts, licensed hunters and anglers, Indigenous land users and local communities. Additionally, protected areas create opportuni- ties for ecotourism and recreation, strengthening the connection between communities and nature. Concerns exist regarding Indigenous-led conservation efforts and land ownership. Indig- enous Protected and Conserved Areas require a complementary Crown government legislation to enshrine conserved areas in Crown law, which can be provincial or federal. Manitoba retains Crown jurisdiction over the province’s natural resources and any new protected area designation in Crown law must be agreed to by the province and requires public consultation as part of the process. Protecting natural areas can spur growth in ec- otourism, support local enterprises and enhance Manitoba’s reputation as a global destination for natural beauty. These initiatives create jobs, sup- port nearby communities and foster sustainable income streams while safeguarding the ecosys- tems that underpin our economy. Protecting 30 per cent of Manitoba’s lands and waters is also about innovation and adaptation. Conservation does not freeze time or hinder progress. Instead, it employs knowledge-based approaches to tackle habitat loss and climate change. This ensures Manitoba’s natural and cultural heritage thrives despite environmental challenges posed by extractive developments and their associated road networks. Manitoba’s lands and waters are a shared legacy that requires collective responsibility. By fostering partnerships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities, government and industries, we can create a network of protected areas that benefit everyone. The vast majority of protected areas in Manitoba allow licensed hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering, ensuring conservation efforts respect cultural traditions. For over 30 years, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society’s Manitoba chapter has been a steadfast advocate for our shared natural heritage. By helping to protect 30 per cent of Manitoba’s lands and waters, we aim to ensure that wildlife, ecosystems and communities can flourish together through collaborative efforts. This vision is not merely a target; it is a promise to future generations. Protecting Manitoba’s natural areas reaffirms values that define us as Manitobans: resilience, cooperation and a pro- found respect for nature. Together, we can create a future where thriving ecosystems support vibrant communities and conservation becomes a foundation of our shared success. Ron Thiessen is the executive director of the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), Manitoba Chapter. What it takes to apologize IT is the epitome of irony that U.S. President Donald Trump — who has never offered an apology to anyone — would request an apolo- gy from Episcopal Bishop Mariann Budde. Apologies are deceptively simple. You acknowledge that you harmed some- one and say that you are sorry. But the reality of an apology is much more complicated as indicated by the Trump/ Budde imbroglio. There are two primary requirements for an apology, one being an admission that you did something wrong and two, that you care enough about the other person or the relationship to take on the emotional discomfort of owning your mistake and apologizing for it. To complicate matters further, how do you decide what is wrong? What is wrong is often entirely subjective. Trump thought it was wrong for Budde to bring “her church into the world of politics in a very ungracious way.” Budde on the other hand stated that “I am not going to apologize for asking for mercy for others.” In thinking about offering an apology it is important to distinguish between intent and reception. There is truth in the adage that “the road to hell is paved with good inten- tions.” But most people believe that if they are doing something with good intentions, they cannot be wrong. Furthermore, the idea of admitting wrongdoing is incredibly threat- ening to many people who have trouble sep- arating their actions from their character. If you do something wrong, are you a bad person? Apologies are a major threat to our sense of identity and self-esteem. If, for example, you are employed in a helping profession, how likely is it that you are going to be able to admit that you harmed rather than helped someone? And what are the societal and cultural norms that govern how you respond to accountabil- ity? Most often these norms work against the admission of guilt because of potential litigation concerns. To be effective, an apology requires an attitude of generosity, honesty, humility, commitment and courage; it involves an admission of regret and responsibility for mistakes made. The key to understanding the psychology of apologies lies in our shared humanity. We make mistakes. Apologies are pre- mised on our ability to admit to our fallibil- ity. Unfortunately, as a society we have moved away from empathy, civil discourse, debate, compassion and mutual respect. How did we get to the point where the president of the United States asks Budde for an apology by insulting her? If you want someone to apologize to you, do you call them “nasty, not compelling or smart, and inappropriate?” The Trump/Budde controversy is a sad commentary on the state of our affairs. Apologies can be helpful in helping people heal and move on from upsetting experienc- es. But how often do we receive a sincere apology? Not very often. We are hamstrung by groupthink where those with whom we con- fer enable us to avoid taking responsibility for our behaviour. In responding to Donald Trump, Budde said she did her best to try to try to present an alternative to “the culture of contempt.” Indeed, name calling, us-versus-them think- ing and scapegoating have become the norm. With apologies, we must move beyond right-versus-wrong thinking. The reality of conflict is that it is common for offences to occur in the context of other offences. When it comes to hurt feelings often both people feel misunderstood and poorly treated. If one individual can be the better person and apologize for their portion of harm, it can open communication to allow the other party to apologize as well. Ideally an exchange of apologies could help Trump and Budde move forward in a way that restores respect, caring and trust. I dream of a world where people can mutu- ally admit to their mistakes and apologize. I hope against hope that the Trumps and Buddes of the world can resolve their differ- ences amicably. Mac Horsburgh lives in Winnipeg. SUSAN WALSH / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILES As he left the U.S. presidency, Joe Biden announced changes to relax America’s stance on Cuba. RON THIESSEN MAC HORSBURGH PETER MCKENNA If you want someone to apologize to you, do you call them “nasty, not compelling or smart, and inappropriate?” ;