An error confirms USAID

News from Cuba | Friday, 20 December 2013

Details of a six million dollar plan by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), intended to destabilize the government of Cuba, were accidentally discovered when the documents were sent unclassified and over an unsecured line to officials of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana.

As was mistakenly revealed, the USAID?s initiative SOL-OAA-13-000110, launched on 10 July 2013, the sum was earmarked to finance the work of at least 20 counterrevolutionary organizations that had requested funds to carry out the subversive tasks entrusted them "to overthrow the communist regime."

Details of the inadvertently disclosed plan include draft budgets, forms to monitor and evaluate the progress of the plan, organizational charts and some experiences derived from other projects designed for destabilizing Cuba under the Helms-Burton Act passed by the U.S. Congress in 1996 to strengthen the U.S. blockade.

Section 109 of this Act authorizes the government to "provide

assistance and support to individuals and independent non-governmental organizations in their efforts towards democratization of Cuba", a euphemism that serves as a basis for legalizing U.S. interference in the internal affairs of Cuba in open violation of international law.

USAID is directly subordinate to the State Department of the U.S.

government and officially its main tasks are to the offer development loans, technical assistance, emergency funds, and other forms of aid to foreign countries.

It is well-known, however, that the U.S. government uses this agency to interfere in the internal affairs and to destabilize other

countries in accordance with the interests of its foreign policy.

USAID in Latin America has a dark history of interference which has on several occasions resulted in the expulsion of their representatives from nations in the region by declaring them persona non grata in defense of their national sovereignty.

Being a government agency, USAID usually employs non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to perform its core tasks. These NGO?s can in turn have other sub-contractors whose managers and staff in general are not likely to meet certain formalities that are required of USAID due to its governmental nature.

Many of these NGOs that enter into contracts with USAID are neither "non-governmental" nor independent; they are mere fictions set up to perform murky tasks which in turn generate shady fund dealings.

This has become apparent in the conflicts between alleged

Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) that promote "democracy" in Cuba and the USAID. Especially since most of the ultimate beneficiaries of these actions are Cuban counter-revolutionary organizations based in the island or in the United States, that on account of their illegal and/or nebulous character, are not subject to appropriate financial control measures.

The leaders and spokespersons of the NGOs complain about the lack of "security" that characterizes the U.S. agency?s handling of its mission and about the allegedly exaggerated requests for information on their activities which obstruct their work.

Freedom House, based in Washington, voluntarily returned a "subsidy" of $1.7 million dollars destined to actions against Cuba in 2011 after complaints that the USAID was asking for "too much information" on how the funds were to be used, including the identities and travel plans of the participants.

NGOs that are responsible for the direct performance of terrorist

actions in the field or that are likely to be detected by those who

are targeted, consider that the USAID?s requests for information make the actions more difficult and "increase the risk of what we do."

Such shortcomings were present in the case of the above-mentioned $6 million dollar plan to destabilize the Cuban government that was discovered because the USAID did not take the necessary safety precautions and left "in the open " the exact amounts and the objectives of each of the plan?s actions.

It is certainly very curious that an NGO refuses to report on the

tasks that their members are to undertake when these are supposed to "foster the development of democracy" in the country they allegedly intend to assist.

| top | back | home |
Share on FacebookTweet this