With HIV regime-change ruse in Cuba, another black eye for USAID

The US Agency for International Development was alleged to have been using its programs as cover to undermine the Cuban government. It's far from the first recent claim of political meddling for the US aid arm.

AP
Pictures and documents related to what the Associated Press writes was a USAID scheme to provide cover stories to foreign activists visiting Cuba, whose intent was to encourage dissent against the government among students.

It's been a rough few years for the United States Agency for International Development in Latin America. 

From a USAID contractor jailed in 2009 in Cuba for alleged spying, to Bolivian President Evo Morales kicking the agency out of his country in 2013, the climate in parts of the region for US aid and influence is growing frostier.

Today, the Associated Press broke a story that USAID backed a program in Cuba that brought Latin American youth to the island in an alleged effort to stir up political dissent. The youngsters from Costa Rica, Venezuela, and Peru traveled to Cuba posing as tourists or health workers leading HIV prevention workshops, but with the real goal of grooming opposition activists. 

This comes just months after the AP uncovered a “Cuba Twitter” program also designed to undermine the Cuban government. The Twitter-like social media platform, which didn't disclose its backers, had about 40,000 users in Cuba. USAID director Rajiv Shah later called it "dumb, dumb, dumb" in a Senate hearing. 

All this from an agency that for decades has struggled to quash suspicions that it, like other US government arms, was a front for espionage and covert meddling. 

"I think they are shooting themselves in the foot," says Geoff Thale, a program director at the Washington Office on Latin America, referring to USAID. The agency runs solid programs focused on health, democracy, and education, he says. “But all of this in Cuba really undercuts that good work.” 

The US and Cuba have a particularly rocky relationship, to put it mildly. In the 1960s, the CIA was fixated on deposing former President Fidel Castro; a 1960 secret memo about Cuba written by a US diplomat favored turning Cubans against him by creating “economic dissatisfaction and hardship.” Others suggested deploying hit men from the mafia or supplying Mr. Castro with an exploding cigar. And, five decades on, the US embargo is still in place – as is Mr. Castro's hand-picked successor, brother Raul Castro

In a statement today, USAID said its work in Cuba, "is not secret, it is not covert, nor is it undercover."

Cuba isn't the only blackspot for the agency. USAID announced earlier this year it planned to leave Ecuador, citing increasingly challenging relations with President Rafael Correa. When Bolivia kicked the agency out of its territory six months prior, botched programming in Cuba was cited, Mr. Thale says.

More broadly, the US's reputation in Latin America has taken a hit from revelations that the National Security Agency spied on leaders in Brazil and Mexico, and the embarrassing grounding of President Morales’s flight in Vienna last year amid suspicions that the leader had former NSA contractor Edward Snowden on board.

While USAID may be pursuing worthwhile goals in Cuba, such as increasing access to information and fostering student exchanges, its work is tainted by its shadowy practices, Thale says.

“If they are doing HIV prevention with young adults, that’s good. Leadership training is good,” he says. “But if we’re really interested in leadership development and youth training, we would get more from it by not doing it in this quasi-covert way.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.