{"id":38544,"date":"2025-01-16T12:30:00","date_gmt":"2025-01-16T12:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/?p=38544"},"modified":"2025-01-16T05:13:33","modified_gmt":"2025-01-16T05:13:33","slug":"bidens-move-to-remove-cuba-from-terror-list-continues-yo-yo-policy-likely-to-be-reversed-by-trump","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.lifeandnews.com\/articles\/bidens-move-to-remove-cuba-from-terror-list-continues-yo-yo-policy-likely-to-be-reversed-by-trump\/","title":{"rendered":"Biden\u2019s move to remove Cuba from terror list continues \u2018yo-yo\u2019 policy likely to be reversed by Trump"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Jason M. Blazakis<\/a>, Middlebury<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Biden administration has signaled to Congress<\/a> its intention to remove Cuba\u2019s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But here\u2019s the twist: The move will only become legal upon the publication of a Federal Register notice<\/a> \u2013 and that will likely happen under President Joe Biden\u2019s successor, Donald Trump, who looks set to push a much more hawkish approach<\/a> toward the Caribbean island.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This would mirror what Trump did to Biden at the tail end of the Republican\u2019s first presidency by putting Cuba back on the terror list when a Federal Register notice was published<\/a> on Jan. 22, 2021 \u2013 after Biden\u2019s inauguration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The ball is now in Trump\u2019s court again. Given his comments and past stances \u2013 and notably that of Marco Rubio, a Cuban American politician who is Trump\u2019s pick for secretary of state and has a long-standing record of animosity toward the island\u2019s Communist government<\/a> \u2013 it could well be the case that the yo-yoing of U.S. policy on Cuba continues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But not necessarily so: The incoming administration has other sanction options at its disposal that could serve to pressure Havana without isolating the nation from the international community.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A matter of timing<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The Biden administration\u2019s move to delist Cuba<\/a> should come as no surprise.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The terrorism designation change was presaged by the decision in early 2024 to remove Cuba from the \u201cnot fully cooperating\u201d with anti-terrorism efforts<\/a> list due to Havana\u2019s counterterrorism efforts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Throughout the Biden administration, Cuba has worked with U.S. law enforcement<\/a> \u2013 primarily through its engagement with the FBI as well as through the multilateral body Financial Action Task Force<\/a> \u2013 to combat illicit financing, including the funding of terrorism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But despite these efforts, it was always unlikely that the Biden administration would remove Cuba from the terrorism list before the presidential election in November 2024, especially given the Democrats\u2019 need to look tough on security issues<\/a> \u2013 a key issue in Trump\u2019s campaign.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That, coupled with Florida\u2019s politics<\/a> \u2013 Cuban Americans are an important electoral force in the state and tend to strongly support Cuba\u2019s inclusion on the terrorism list \u2013 made a change in the nation\u2019s designation an electoral grenade.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Biden\u2019s move now is less challenging because the next major federal election is two years away, when the midterm House and Senate races could decide control of the legislative bodies where margins are currently slim.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As such, I believe that removing Cuba from the state sponsors of terrorism list is unlikely to hinder the campaigns of Democrats running in congressional races in late 2026.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"The
Cubans for Biden campaign in Miramar, Fla., in 2020. AP Photo\/Carolyn Kaster<\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

A legal basis for delisting<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Biden\u2019s move is not only politically insulated, but it is arguably legally valid. Cuba meets the legal criteria to be delisted \u2013 just as it did when the Obama administration removed Cuba from the list<\/a> in 2015.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To be eligible for delisting<\/a>, the State Department\u2019s Counterterrorism Bureau, where I once worked<\/a> and directed its terrorist designation efforts, would have to illustrate that Cuba has not engaged in providing support for acts of terrorism over the previous six months; and that the nation\u2019s government has provided assurances that it will no longer engage in acts supporting terrorism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Biden administration has evidently made a decision, as Obama did previously, that Cuba is no longer supporting leftist communist groups that the U.S. has designated as terrorist.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cuba has a checkered history of supporting such groups. It was put on the U.S. list in the early 1980s<\/a> due to its actions supporting groups including Colombia\u2019s FARC and ELN<\/a>. While the latter is enmeshed in long-term, sometimes rocky peace talks with the Colombian government<\/a>, the former has dissolved and was removed from the State Department\u2019s Foreign Terrorist Organization list<\/a> in 2021.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I doubt that Cuba\u2019s yo-yoing on and off the terrorist list is over.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For Trump to add Cuba back on, he will need Rubio\u2019s State Department to prove that Cuba has \u201cprovided repeated support for acts of international terrorism<\/a>.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Considering that the same set of civil servants with legal expertise just determined that Cuba no longer warranted the listing, this will, at a minimum, require some creative legal interpretation by the lawyers at the State Department and White House.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is, I believe, likely that political pressure will be applied on these lawyers to make a very different decision \u2013 one that will certainly be called into question for its legal validity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trump could also threaten a new state sponsor of terrorism listing to gain concessions from Cuba on a broad range of unresolved bilateral issues between the United States and Cuba. For example, the case of Joanne Chesimard, also known as Assata Shakur<\/a> \u2013 a Black Liberation Army activist who killed a New Jersey state trooper and fled to Cuba in 1984 after escaping prison. Her case, given the efforts by the U.S. government<\/a> to have Chesimard extradited to the U.S., has remained an area of contention between Cuba and the U.S.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

And while Chesimard\u2019s case is not an example of Cuban-sponsored terrorism, State Department decisions on new listings and delistings have in the past been linked to nonterrorism issues. For instance, North Korea was removed by the George W. Bush administration because of Pyongyang\u2019s promise<\/a> to halt its nuclear program and allow inspectors access to its Yongbyon nuclear reactor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n