Return to Home Page Cuba, Marketing, and The Helms-Burton Act Paul Herbig Executive Summary: For the past thirty-eight years, the United States has waged an economic war against a neighbor only ninety miles south of Florida. The island of Cuba and its leader, General Fidel Castro, has been a thorn in the side of every administration since President Kennedy. Though now in a post Cold War era the island does not hold the same military strategic advantage, the economic embargo remains in place. With the advent of the Helms-Burton Act passed in 1996, the U.S. further tighten the embargo around Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act allows American citizens and Cuban exiles the opportunity to sue foreign companies using expropriated properties. The Helms-Burton Act also restricts any travel to the United States by any executive or their family who works for a firm dealing in expropriated property. This law has caused many problems in the international arena as many countries are proclaiming the law extra-territorial. As the United States continues to be the vanguard for free trade around the world, it continues to isolate Cuba. This double standard threatens the United States credibility when dealing with other trading partners. Opportunities for business in Cuba has never been greater. With the freeing of economic conditions and Fidel Castro’s need for hard currency, companies from around the world are pouring capital into Cuba. The only country not taking advantage of this opportunity is the U.S. U.S. business interests should be allowed to enter this market. President Clinton should base his Cuban policy on the common interest of 245 million Americans having a peaceful, normal relationship with Cuba. The policy should encourage democratic development and economic stability instead of seeking to wreak economic havoc and the promotion of emigration to our shores. The repeal of the Helms-Burton Act should be the first step in allowing American businesses the opportunity to change Cuba through free market ideas. Introduction Only ninety miles from the United States lies the last stand of the world’s longest running dictatorship. Even after a 38-year ‘war’ waged by the United States, the leader and the country remain strong to their cause. The subject of this paper is Cuba and its potential for business. As the Caribbean’s largest and least commercialized island, the potential for future investments is enormous. For a country that is so close to the U.S., so little is known concerning the current conditions. One man, . Fidel Castro, leads the revolution against ‘Yankee Imperialism’ and all things’ capitalistic. By embracing communism and all of its radical reforms, Castro single handily turned a nation from being prosperous into financial ruins. As seen around the globe in recent years from Romania to Eastern Germany, etc.; the fall of communism has come about due to economic and social pressures from within each country. Even with the fall of the mighty U.S.S. R., Cuba manages to persevere. This paper presents a current picture of Cuba and its future as a potential market for U.S. businesses. History Before one can discuss Cuba and its modern day problems, one must understand its history. A few facts about the present state of Cuba help to understand the current situation. The facts are listed in Appendix I. Like many fledgling countries trying to throw off their European conquerors, Cubans have participated in many revolutions vying for their independence, primarily against Spain. Recent history with the U.S. can be traced back to Feb. 15, 1898 when the USS Maine blew up in Havana Harbor. The U.S. press stirred Washington into action. The U.S. declared war on Spain in April 1898 after Spain rejected the US’s offer of $300 million to purchase Cuba. A peace treaty, signed in December, forced Spain to surrender Cuba and provided for its temporary military occupation by the U.S. The U.S.’s declaration of war had provided that it would respect Cuba’s right to self government, and while the U.S. had annexed Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Philippines, it had to be content to militarily occupying Cuba. In 1902, the Republic of Cuba was established. The Platt Amendment to the Cuban constitution gave the U.S. the right to intervene in the interests of a stable government. The Platt Amendment was canceled in 1934 under the negotiation of a 99-year lease for a naval base. That base is known today as the Guantanamo Bay Naval and Marine Base. Throughout the 1920's, U.S. companies owned 66% of Cuba’s farmland with large financial interests in nearly every other industry. Over the next 30 years, Cubans had to feel the brunt of two different dictatorial rulers. Cuba as known today started on January 1, 1959 with the overthrow of the government by a young lawyer named Fidel Castro. At first, many Cubans applauded the government’s downfall and hoped that Castro’s promised reforms would benefit their country. Castro immediately began to reform the nation’s economy, cutting electricity rates, and nationalizing any landholding larger than 400 hectares. Relations with the U.S. rapidly deteriorated as U.S. interests were affected by the nationalization of U.S.-owned petroleum, telephone and electricity companies and sugar mills. US citizens suffered more than those of any other foreign country from the confiscation (nationalization) of property because they had the largest investments in Cuba. Cuba’s promises to pay for the property went largely unfulfilled. ( This has directly led to formulation of the U.S. trade embargo, 37 years later, of the Helms-Burton Act.) In 1962, President Kennedy proclaimed an embargo on most U.S. trade with Cuba. Cuba by now had fully embraced communism by signing trading and defense pacts with the Soviet Union. After several tense weeks with Cuba over Soviet atomic missiles, the USSR and Cuba backed down. This became the low point of Cuban-U.S. relations. Despite massive Soviet aid, Cuba’s economy remained shattered. The downfall of the Soviet Union in 1989, coupled with continued U.S. trade bans isolated Cuba. In December 1991, the Cuban Constitution was amended to remove all references to Marxism-Leninism. In 1993, laws were passed that allowed Cubans to own and use U.S. dollars and self-employment. Taxes on dollar incomes and profits were levied in 1994, and in September 1996 foreign companies were allowed to wholly own and operate businesses and purchase real estate. Cuba’s Present Economic Environment Cuba’s Gross Domestic Product has been estimated at $20.3 billion U.S. dollars. This would rank it 64th out of the world economy. Average yearly per capita income is $1880 U.S. dollars. The Cuban economy primary relies on its agricultural outputs for trade. Most of the work is done by hand making most operations rather inefficient. Also due to dependence of an agricultural society, the economy is dependent on weather to provide for a successful year. Major industries of Cuba include: sugar, minerals, tobacco, and tourism. Cuba’s major trading partners include: Western Europe, Latin America, Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. (www.LONELYPLANET.com) Appendix II lists Cuba’s current intra-regional trading partners. Facts for the Business Traveler As of 1993, the following categories are able to be licensed to travel to Cuba: U.S. and foreign government officials, including representatives of international organizations of which the United States is a member, traveling on official business; persons gathering news or making news or documentary films; persons visiting close relatives residing in Cuba; and full-time professionals engaging in full-time research in their professional areas where the research is specifically related to Cuba, is largely academic in nature, and there is substantial likelihood the product of research will be disseminated. In 1996, the Helms-Burton Act further restricted travel to Cuba by allowing travel only in the case of an immediate family emergency with proof from a Cuban doctor mandatory. The Clinton administration has suggested that the controls are a useful means of denying hard currency to the Cuban government and thus pressuring it to liberalize and show greater respect for human rights. The counter argument is that allowing American travel to Cuba would do more to encourage liberalization than tightening economic pressure, which has not worked in more than thirty years and will not work now. (www.us.net.cip/ban.txt) This doesn’t mean by being an American citizen that one cannot travel to Cuba, it just means that one cannot travel legally or directly from the U.S. Amercian citizens can travel to Cuba, they just cannot spend money. If money were to exchange hands, this would be a violation of the United States’ Trading with the Enemy Act. U.S. tourists are not refused in Cuba. There are not any flights from the US, but Cubans haven’t been stamping passports since 1990, regardless of one’s nationality. As an American you can get to Cuba either on a package tour or independently from either Canada or Mexico. (Pelton, 1995) It is easier to get to Cuba from Canada rather than from Mexico since a higher number of tour operators are Canadian. Not too many Mexicans visit Cuba since the climate is the same. Once in Cuba, you must have a reservation for at least three nights in a Cuban hotel and an airline ticket showing your departure date. Another benefit of being part of a tour package is the procurement of food. Shortages of food and all other items plague the island. By being part of a group, one is guaranteed at least three meals a day. Remember, this is technically illegal, a violation of the U.S. Trading with the Enemy Act. But there has yet been one trial brought against U.S. citizens visiting Cuba illegally. Foreign citizens have an advantage over U.S. citizens when it comes to doing business with Cuba. Since U.S. citizens are hindered by the Helms-Burton Act, foreign nationals are able to invest in Cuba at the present time. One word of warning for foreign citizens, be wary of investing in Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act has established rules for U.S. citizens and Cuban nationals the ability to sue for reparations over Cuban-nationalized properties. When the current regime falls, the international courts can expect many lawsuits against current holders of Cuban property by many American businesses. Once in Cuba, getting around is inexpensive. Cubana de Aviacion offers many low rates around the country for less than $50 US dollars. Trains offer the best way to get around Cuba. Buses often won’t accept foreigners and, when they do, payment is required in U.S. dollars. (Pelton, 1995) Appendix III provides a summary of traveler facts. Helms-Burton Act The Helms-Burton Act is the latest shot fired in a 38-year battle between Cuba and the United States. The original draft of the Helms-Burton Act started on April 5, 1991 when Senator Connie Mack (R.-Fla.) joined with Senators Phil Gramm (R-Tex.), Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Joseph Leberman (D-Conn.) introduced a bill closing the loophole in the current embargo. Under the proposed legislation, the President would have authority to withhold federal assistance from any country that buys sugar from Cuba. (Smith, 1995) This bill failed to pass in Congress. All other anti-Cuban legislation was temporary shelved due to the up coming election year. On February 24th, 1995, several planes flown by Brothers in Arms, a Cuban refugee pilot organization flew toward Cuba. What followed next is still debated. Cuban fighter jets maintain that their airspace was violated. Brothers in Arms reply that they were in international waters and were provoked. Regardless of who was right, two American planes were blown out of the sky by four Cuban Migs, killing four Cuban exiles. The ensuing upheaval by the vocal and politically strong Cuban refugees out of Miami, Florida led to the first draft of the Helms-Burton Act. Through the media, Congress justified the passing of the Helms-Burton Law. The passage of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act ( Helms-Burton Act) on March 12, 1996 resulted in legislation that aims to tighten the U.S. embargo against Cuba in two ways. First, it would allow American claimants and Cuban exiles living in the United States to sue foreign companies ‘trafficking’ in property expropriated by the Cuban government in 1959. Second, it would also prohibit foreign business people and their families from entering the United States if they ‘traffic’ in expropriated properties. (www.us.net/cip.ott.htm) Of the people who have a right to sue, there are 5,911 certified claims, of which some 800 are over the title III’s US $50,000 threshold. The total current value of certified claims has been estimated at approximately US $6 billion, and the value of uncertified claims to be as high as US $100 billion. (Anderson,1996) Immediately cries of the Helms-Burton Law being extraterritorial came from around the globe. American officials deflected the criticism and began to deny entry to into the United States to executives and major stockholders of firms that invest in confiscated property in Cuba. American officials believe that there are well over 100 firms, operating in joint ventures with Cuba, that are using confiscated property. One example is Sherrit International Corporation, a Canadian mining company operating on property in eastern Cuba owned by Freeport-MacMoRan Inc. On July 15, 1996, the US government sent letters to nine-persons affiliated with Sherrit warning them they were no longer welcome in the United States if they did not sever their ties with the firm within 45 days. (Wall Street Journal, March 18, 1997) On March 17, 1997, the State Department further informed Sherrit International Corp. that four more of its executives or their families were not welcomed into the US due to their continued use of the seized property in Cuba. (Ibid). The initial list that the State Department targeted was not large. It consisted of a small number of key investors. The U.S. strategy was to make examples of several high profile companies doing business in Cuba, including such firms such as Sherritt; Cemex, a Mexican cement conglomerate; and Gruppo Domos, the Mexican firms that has contracted to overhaul Cuba’s phone system. (Marquis, 1996). An example of an American company doing business internationally running afoul of Helms-Burton is Wal-Mart. On March 6, 1997, Wal-Mart Canada removed Cuban -made pajamas from the shelves of its 136 stores across Canada. The move was prompted by concern that the retailer might be violating the Helms-Burton Act. Yet Wal-Mart found itself in a catch- 22. In removing the Cuban apparel from its shelves, Wal-Mart risked violating a law in Canada (a partner in the North American Free Trade Agreement) designed to prevent Canadian subsidiaries of US companies from complying with U.S. trade embargos. U.S. law imposes a fine of as much as $1 million against American companies that violate Washington’s trade embargoes. Canadian law provides a similar penalty of as much as 1.5 million Canadian dollars ( U.S. $1.1million ) against Canadian companies that comply with foreign trade sanctions such as the U.S. trade blockade against Cuba. (Urquhart, 1997). After two weeks, Wal-Mart returned the Cuban-made pajamas to its Canadian shelves. Wal-Mart said in a statement that it decided to resume sales of Cuban pajamas following “a consultation with Wal-Mart Canada customers, legal advisors and Canadian government officials. US reaction was one of disappointment. An American official, however, noting that the Cuban pajamas were supplied by a Canadian distributor, said that if this involves a Canadian concern, Wal-Mart Canada, doing something in Canada, “ I don’t know if there is an issue here.” (Urquhart, 1997) World Response to Helms-Burton World condemnation faced the United States as it started to enforce the Helms-Burton Act. Mexico, the Organization of American States, the European Union, Canada, have all weighed the aspects of the Helms-Burton Act. Each country and organization has determined that the law violates international law. Several countries and organizations began to pass their own laws punishing companies who follow the U.S. law. The Inter-American Juridical Committee of the Organization of American States on August 23, 1996, examined two aspects of the Helms-Burton Act: the protection of the property rights of nationals and the extraterritorial effects of jurisdiction. The Committee outlined the possible international effects of the Act and considered those norms if International Law that regulates the standard procedure for nationalization or expropriation of property and determined areas in which the Helms-Burton Act does not conform to International Law, including: conform to International Law, including: •• U.S. courts are not the appropriate forum for the resolution of State-to State claims. U.S. courts are not the appropriate forum for the resolution of State-to State claims. ••The U.S. does not have the right to attribute liability to nationals of Third States for a claim against Cuba. ••The U.S. does not have the right to take on claims of persons who were not nationals at the time of the expropriation. ••The U.S. does not have the right to impose compensation in any amount greater than the effective damages, including interest. ••The U.S. may not deprive a foreign national of the right to contest the basis and the amount of claims that may affect his party. The Committee decided that the U.S. does not have the right to control acts of “trafficking in confiscated property” when there is no apparent connection between such acts and the protection of its essential sovereign interests. ( www.us.net/cip/!memoono.htm) Mexico’s opinion was expressed on August 28, 1996. The Mexican Government stated that the Helms-Burton Act violated the principles of International Law, specifically those that guarantee equal sovereignty of states and non-intervention. Therefore, Mexico concludes that the Cuban people have the exclusive right to decide the nature of their economic, social, and political regime. The Charters of the OAS and Resolution 2625 of the U.N.’s General Assembly forbid the imposition of economic or political measures intended to force another state’s will, and the Mexican position employs these to denounce the economic embargo the U.S. has placed on Cuba. Mexico objects to the extraterritorial enforcement measures of the Helms-Burton Act that challenge the right of Mexican individuals to carry out financial and commercial operations anywhere in the world. (www.us.net/cip/!memoonm.htm) The Mexican countermeasure to the Helms-Burton Act is known as La Ley Antidoto - the Antidote Act. The EU is America’s largest trading partner and vice versa in a combined trade worth more than US$ 230 billion. Around three million U.S. workers are employed by European-owned companies. Around 51 percent of foreign direct investment in the U.S. comes from the EU, while more than 42 percent of foreign investment in the EU comes from the U.S. (Barber, 1996) American financial interest abroad in the EU are jeopardized by the Helms-Burton Act. The European Union convened on July 15, 1996 to determine measures they could take in response to the damages to the interests of EU companies resulting from the implementation of the Helms-Burton Act. The problem was addressed by the EU, instead of the individual nations, in order to: •• send a signal of unity to the United States •• achieve a level of protection unattainable by national measures •• maintain the unity of the internal market •• facilitate legal proceedings anywhere that U.S. citizens or companies may hold assets The articles of the resolution include guidelines for: •• the provision of necessary information to the EU by the person whose economic interests are affected •• the confidentiality of information provided to the EU •• non-compliance with contested U.S. legislation •• “claw-back” clause, enables the recovery of amounts obtained by U.S. persons under the contested legislation •• member states to determine effective penalties if a breach of the Regulation occurs (www.us.net/cip/eu.htm) As of April 14, 1997, the European Union and the United States have come to a temporary truce over U.S. penalties against some foreign companies doing business in Cuba. A new timetable has been reached with talks scheduled in October to bring a resolution of the extraterritorial reaches of Helms-Burton. Canada, the U.S.’s largest single trading country in terms of annual exports and imports passed retaliatory measures for Canadian companies choosing to follow U.S. laws rather than Canadian laws. Canada has become a major trading partner with Cuba and a big investor in the Cuban economy. But Canada’s annual trade with Cuba amounts to only about half what Canada trades with the U.S. in an average day. (Urquhart, 1997) Canada did not have a large vested interest in Cuba in 1959. The U.S. had approximately US$1.8 billion in assists seized. Canada had only U.S.$9.4 million in confiscated property. (Raphael, 1997) In Appendix IV is a summary of Canadian Legislation forbidding Canadian companies from following Helms-Burton. Future of Cuba When determining the future of Cuba, one must first look too why Castro holds his power. Castro came to power on the wave of a tremendously popular nationalist revolution, and for years enjoyed the support of the overwhelming majority of Cubans. His popularity has waned as economic problems have increased. Whether he could any longer win an election -or, more to the point, an approval rating- is open to question. Even so, there remains a significant reservoir of support, if only because many Cubans see no alternative to the Revolution and because many have a vested interest in its survival. (Smith, 1995) Another viewpoint states that Castro survives because: from the liquidation of the middle and industrial classes as a functional entity; the purging of the armed forces and hence their dismantling as source of opposition; the conversion of the administrative bureaucracy into political activists rather than economic actors - to the power of repression as raw power, whether or not embossed by an ideology. (Horowitz, 1995) There is virtually no organized opposition in Cuba. There are a few incredibly courageous and resolute human rights activists - probably no more than a couple of hundred altogether - but their task is the advancement of human rights, not the overthrow of Castro. (Smith, 1995) If we look at the nature and cause of Cuba’s present economic crisis, it results from the collapse of Cuba’s trade links with the former Soviet Union - not from the loss of subsidies, as is commonly believed, but from a disruption of the flow of goods. (Smith, 1995) Money did not actually change between the Soviet Union and Cuba. Cuba relied on trading sugar, nickel and other products for gas, oil, and other manufactured goods. This allowed Cuba the luxury of not losing any hard currency. Presently, Cuba’s movement to a free society is slowly taking place. Fidel Castro age has become an underlying factor. The number of Cubans still alive who were directly involved in the 1959 revolution has decreased, while the Cuban youth, which now make up more than 50 percent of the population, have become more alienated from a cause that they did not participate and more attracted to a free market-based economy. (Purcell,1995) Prior to the revolution, most of Cuba’s foreign trade was with Western nations, almost 70 percent with the U.S. After Castro’s accession to power, Cuba’s trade was reoriented primarily toward Socialist countries. Today, a portion of Cuba’s trade goes to Western nations. To many in the U.S. business community, it seems only natural to assume that re-opening the Cuban market will favor its products given the pre-revolutionary tradition, the island’s geographical proximity to the U.S. mainland, and the need of the Cuban economy for U.S. goods, know-how, and technology. The prospect of renewing trade with Cuba is also surrounded by certain mystical assumptions which attach gargantuan proportions to the Cuban market, enhanced by the vision of selling to a state-controlled economy with its massive purchasing power. (Suchlicki,1995) Another way to understand how backwards the Cuban economy has become, is to look at the typical wages of workers. University-level graduates, on whose education the state has made large investments, are forbidden from participating in self-employment activities, and must continue to work for the common good. (Perez-Lopez, 1995) A Havana dentist earned 340 pesos a month, while a hairdresser earned on the average 1200 pesos. This reverse disparity keeps a middle class from forming. Even with the large number of problems a businessman faces, foreign ventures are expanding at an incredible rate. In November 1993 there were 99 joint ventures with foreign investors, 21 of which are in the tourism sector. (Perez-Lopez,1995) Appendix V list joint ventures that are currently available to foreign investment. An interesting side note is the fact that Cuban officials are actively promoting joint ventures with foreign investors as a disguised effort of privatization. Yet the participation is limited only to foreigners and not Cuban citizens. The recent increase in joint ventures can be attributed to Cuba’s need for hard currency. In 1982, Cuba passed legislation that for the first time allowed foreign investment in the island in the form of joint ventures with domestic enterprises. Cuba’s primary interest is to attract the foreign investors that will provide necessary raw materials and export markets to permit the operation of manufacturing plants that are idle or operating at low levels of capacity. (Perez-Lopez, 1995) Several of the more liberalizing policies are: foreign capitalists are now allowed to have a controlling share, to bring in their own management teams, and to repatriate profits under very attractive terms. (Perez-Lopez, 1995) Helms-Burton Act has put some of the joint ventures on hold. Yet as discussed at the Helms-Burton and International Business symposium, “ .... that the current situation may in fact offer small- and medium- sized businesses growth opportunities in Cuba. It will also give Cuba an opportunity to diversify its market.” (www.us.net/cip/ott.htm) Companies without a large international presence can invest in Cuba without Helms-Burton repercussions. This can become a market niche, a competitive advantage for a small business looking to do business abroad. The Cuban economy now recognizes that other currencies besides the Cuban peso must be utilized. Until July 1993, it was illegal for Cuban citizens to have foreign currencies. Fidel Castro changed this policy to try to legalize the foreign exchange black markets that had deflated the value of the peso. The foreign currencies that could be used to make purchases of goods and services are: German mark, French franc, Spanish peseta, pound sterling, Canadian dollar, and U.S. dollars. This dollarization had led to the creation of “diplotiendas” or dollar stores. These stores were traditionally restricted to diplomats, tourists, and those close to the government. With recent change of law over holding foreign currencies, the number of stores has grown from four in 1994 to more than 600 this year. At Tiendas Universo, a vast array of products from around the world is available to shoppers. Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and 7-Up from their respective subsidiaries in Mexico; Wise mini-pretzels; Dutch beer; cookies and cakes from Argentina and Spain; clothes from Europe and Mexico; and Chinese made toys are but a small selection of what is available. (Echevarria, 1996) Although the average Cuban is strapped for cash, tourists and Cubans with relatives outside of Cuba make up the main market for these stores. Approximately 15 percent of Cuba’s population has relatives who wire dollars through Canada and elsewhere - an estimated $300 million a year. Most of this money is spent for consumer goods in the diplotiendas. The stores either are joint ventures with the Cuban government or state owned. The government doubles the price of most items and takes a profit on half of what is sold. In 1995, the dollar stores generated $500 million in sales. (Echevarria, 1996) Another capitalistic venture that the Cuban government has started is a fast food chain called El Rapido that attempts to profit off the youth of Cuba who has a passion for American-style food. Hamburgers, hot dogs, french fries, Tropi-Cola ( Cuba’s imitation of Coca-Cola), and a Cuban version of pizza is served for dollars. Despite the recent Helms-Burton Act, the winners from this retail growth are the Canadian and Mexican food exporters, who are eager to furnish the products to the restaurants. (Echevarria, 1996) Conclusions and Implications for the Future Is the Helms-Burton Act the answer for the United States’s handling of Cuba? Certainly from the reaction from the international community a resounding “ NO!” is the answer. The United States already is trying other methods of getting rid of Fidel Castro. Over the last 38 years, the U.S. government has staked its hopes of getting rid of Cuban leader Fidel Castro on everything from an invasion in 1961, to poison cigars. Now, it’s trying something different: economic incentives. A White House report released last week put a tangible bounty on removing Castro from power - up to $8 billion in foreign aid once he’s gone. Washington insists the offer - which will be broadcast to Cuba on US-run Radio Marti - is not intended to incite revolution. Castro has condemned the US move as ‘Machiavellian” (Williams, 1997) President Clinton should base his Cuban policy on the common interest of 245 million Americans in having a peaceful, normal relationship with our near neighbors. The policy should encourage democratic development and economic stability instead of seeking to wreak economic havoc and provoke endless waves of emigration to our shores. He has let shortsighted political calculations and the demands of one Florida constituency (Cuban exiles) overshadow this far larger interest in sensibly managing relations with Cuba. (www.us.net/cip/ban.txt) Anderson, M.Jean. “U.S. Means Business with Anti-Cuba Law.” Business Mexico. August 1996.p.44-45. Barber,Lionel. “EU-US Relations.” Europe Special Report. November 1996. ESR 2-3. Echevarria, Vito. “Dollar Diplomacy.” Hispanic. November 1996. pp. 50-56. Horowitz, Irving Louis. “Castro and the End of Ideology.” Cuban Communism 1959-1995.1995. Marquis, Christopher. “U.S. Prepares to Enforce Cuban Embargo.” The Miami Herald. May 8th 1996. Pelton, Robert Young. The World’s Most Dangerous Places. 1995. p.600. Perez-Lopez, Jorge F. “Cuba’s Underground Economy.” Cuban Communism 1959-1995. 1995. Purcell, Susan Kaufman. “Cuba’s Cloudy Future.” Cuban Communism 1959-1995. 1995 Raphael, Therese. “ U.S. and Europe Clash Over Cuba.” The Wall Street Journal. March 31, 1997. p. A17. Smith, Wayne S. and Irving Louis Horowitz. “Castro To Fall or Not To Fall?” Cuban Communisim 1959-1995. 1995. Suchlicki, Jaime. “Myths and Realities in U.S.-Cuban Relations.” Cuban Communism 1959- 1995.1995. Urquhart, John. “Wal-mart Pulls Cuban Pajamas From Canada.” Wall Street Journal. March 6th 1997. A3. Urquhart, John. “Wal-mart Puts Cuban Goods Back on Sale.” Wall Street Journal . March 14th 1997. A3. Williams, Krista. “Talk About A Price On His Head.” U.S. News & World Report. February 10, 1997. p.41. www.LONELYPLANET.com/dest/cam/cub.htm www.us.net.cip/ban.txt www.us.net/cip/eu.htm www.us.net/cip/!memoonm.htm www.us.net/cip/!memoono.htm www.us.net/cip/ott.htm “Sherritt Aids Sanctioned over Investment in Cuba.” Wall Street Journal. March 17, 1997. p.C22. Facts about Cuba Official Name: Republic of Cuba Capital: Havana Area: 42,803 sq miles ( 110,859 km) Population:(1991 est.) 10,700,000 ; 250 persons per sq mile; 72.8 urban; 27.2 rural Major Language: Spanish Major Religion: Roman Catholicism Literacy: 96 percent Form of Government: Socialist Republic Major Cities: Havana (2,077,938), Santiago de Cuba (397,024) Chief Manufactured and Mined Products: Nickel, iron ore, copper, sugar, food, textiles, cement, cigars Chief Agricultural Products: Crops- cane sugar, tobacco, citrus fruits, rice, coffee, tropical fruits,vegetables. Livestock- pigs, horses, sheep, goats, cattle. Monetary Unit: 1 Cuban Pesos = 100 centavos. Facts for the Business Traveler Visas: Virtually all visitors require a Cuban visa or Tourist Card, avaliable from travel agencies, tour operators or a Cuban Consulate for a stay of one month. The USA prohibits its citizens from traveling to Cuba unless they obtain a license. Health Risks: Drinking tap water is guaranteed to result in instant weight loss and possibly hepatitis A. Currency: Cuban peso and US dollar (since the Cuban government legalized the use of U.S.$ in 1993, travelers will only require pesos for local bus fares, food on trains and small items.) Note that American Express credit cards and traveler checks are useless in Cuba. Exchange Rate: U.S.$1= 1 peso (official rate) or 30 pesos (black market) Relative costs: Cheap meal: U.S.$2-3 Restaurant meal: U.S.$10-15 Cheap room: U.S.$10 Hotel room: U.S.$20-30 Time: U.S. Eastern Standard Time Weights and Measurements: Metric with U.S. and Spanish variations Tourism: 700,000 visitors per year Current Joint Ventures Available For Foreign Investment ••Construction industry: Factories, producing ceramic tiles, roofing materials, bricks, cement blocks, waste pipes, etc. ••Metal working industry: Factories producing electrical wire, electrodomestic equipment batteries, industrial machinery and equipment. ••Agriculture: Citrus-processing plants, poultry and flower enterprises, the national soil research institute. ••Basic industry: The national electrical system, an oil refinery, a nickel processing complex, plants producing paper, copper, rayon, etc. ••Food industry: Factories producing beer, canned products, and powered milk, the ice cream enterprise “Coppelia,” a rum distillery, and a slaughterhouse. ••Light industry: Six textile manufacturing plants and a factory producing mattresses. ••Transportation: The shipping terminal handling containers at the port of La Habana. ••Electronic industry: An electronics assembly complex and enterprises producing electronic products. ••Sugar industry: Seven sugar refineries and an enterprise providing technical support to the sugar industry. ••Fishing: The entire ocean-going fleet.