Iran’s Ahmadinejad: Sept. 11 attacks a ‘big lie

Iran’s hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Saturday called the official version of the Sept. 11 attacks a “big lie” used by the U.S. as an excuse for the war on terror, state media reported.

Ahmadinejad’s comments, made during an address to Intelligence Ministry staff, come amid escalating tensions between the West and Tehran over its disputed nuclear program. They show that Iran has no intention of toning itself down even with tighter sanctions looming because of its refusal to halt uranium enrichment.

“September 11 was a big lie and a pretext for the war on terror and a prelude to invading Afghanistan,” Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying by state TV. He called the attacks a “complicated intelligence scenario and act.”

The Iranian president has questioned the official U.S. version of the Sept. 11 attacks before, but this is the first time he ventured to label it a “big lie.”

In 2007, New York officials rejected Ahmadinejad’s request to visit the World Trade Center site while he was in the city for a U.N. meeting. The president also sparked an uproar when he said during a lecture in New York that the causes and conditions that led to the attacks, as well as who orchestrated them, still need to be examined.

At the time, he also told Iranian state TV the attacks were “a result of mismanaging and inhumane managing of the world by the U.S,” and that Washington was using Sept. 11 as an excuse to attack others.

He has also questioned the Sept. 11 death toll of around 3,000, claiming the Americans never published the victims’ names.

On the 2007 anniversary of the attacks, the names of 2,750 victims killed in New York were read aloud at a memorial ceremony.

source: yahoo news

Aide says Pakistani Taliban leader Mehsud is dead

Pakistan’s Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud, who led a violent campaign of suicide attacks and assassinations against the Pakistani government, has been killed in a U.S. missile strike, a militant commander and aide to Mehsud said Friday.

Earlier, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi told reporters in Islamabad that intelligence showed Mehsud had been killed in Wednesday’s missile strike on his father-in-law’s house in Pakistan’s lawless tribal area, but authorities would travel to the site to verify his death.

Pakistani and U.S. intelligence officials said the CIA was behind the strike. All spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.

“I confirm that Baitullah Mehsud and his wife died in the American missile attack in South Waziristan,” Taliban commander Kafayat Ullah told The Associated Press by telephone. He would not give any further details.

Mehsud’s demise would be a major boost to Pakistani and U.S. efforts to eradicate the Taliban and al-Qaida.

However, Mehsud has deputies who could take his place. Pakistani intelligence officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Taliban commanders were already believed to be meeting in the lawless tribal areas Friday to choose a replacement.

Three Pakistani intelligence officials said the likeliest successor was Mehsud’s deputy, Hakim Ullah, a commander known for recruiting and training suicide bombers. Two other prominent possibilities, the officials said, were Azmat Ullah and Waliur Rehman, also close associates of Mehsud.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

Whether a new leader could wreak as much havoc as Mehsud depends largely on how much pressure the Pakistani military continues to put on the network, especially in the lawless tribal area of South Waziristan.

Mehsud has al-Qaida connections and has been suspected in the killing of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Pakistan views him as its top internal threat and has been preparing an offensive against him.

For years, the U.S. considered Mehsud a lesser threat to its interests than some of the other Pakistani Taliban, their Afghan counterparts and al-Qaida, because most of his attacks were focused inside Pakistan, not against U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan.

That view appeared to change in recent months as Mehsud’s power grew and concerns mounted that increasing violence in Pakistan could destabilize the U.S. ally and threaten the entire region.

The Pakistani intelligence officials said Mehsud’s body was buried in the village of Nardusai in South Waziristan, near the site of the missile strike.

One official said he had seen a classified intelligence report stating Mehsud was dead and buried, but that agents had not seen the body since the area is under Taliban control.

Pakistani Interior Minister Rehman Malik told reporters in Islamabad he could confirm the death of Mehsud’s wife but not of the Taliban leader himself, although information pointed in that direction.

“Yes, (a) lot of information is pouring in from that area that he’s dead, but I’m unable to confirm unless I have solid evidence,” he said.

Another senior Pakistani intelligence official said phone and other communications intercepts — he would not be more specific — had led authorities to suspect Mehsud was dead, but he also stressed there was no definitive evidence yet.

An American counterterrorism official said the U.S. government was also looking into the reports. The official indicated the United States did not yet have physical evidence — remains — that would prove who died. But he said there were other ways of determining who was killed in the strike. He declined to describe them.

Both officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the matter publicly.

A local tribesman, who also spoke on condition his name not be used, said Mehsud had been at his father-in-law’s house being treated for kidney pain, and had been put on a drip by a doctor, when the missile struck. The tribesman claimed he attended the Taliban chief’s funeral.

Last year, a doctor for Mehsud announced the militant leader had died of kidney failure, but the reports turned out to be false.

In Afghanistan, Defense Ministry spokesman Gen. Mohammad Zahir Azimi said Mehsud’s fighters would cross the border into eastern Afghanistan occasionally to help out one of most ruthless Afghan insurgent leaders Siraj Haqqani.

“He was an international terrorist that affected India, Pakistan and Afghanistan,” Azimi said without confirming Mehsud was dead.

In March, the State Department authorized a reward of up to $5 million for Mehsud. Increasingly, American missiles fired by unmanned drones have focused on Mehsud-related targets.

Pakistan publicly opposes the strikes, saying they anger local tribes and make it harder for the army to operate. Still, many analysts suspect the two countries have a secret deal allowing them.

Malik, the interior minister, said Pakistan’s military was determined to finish off Pakistan’s Taliban.

“It is a targeted law enforcement action against Baitullah Mehsud’s group and it will continue till Baitullah Mehsud’s group is eliminated forever,” he said.

Pakistan’s record on putting pressure on the Taliban network is spotty. It has used both military action and truces to try to contain Mehsud over the years, but neither tactic seemed to work, despite billions in U.S. aid aimed at helping the Pakistanis tame the tribal areas.

Mehsud was not that prominent a militant when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan in 2001 after the Sept. 11 attacks, according to Mahmood Shah, a former security chief for the tribal regions. In fact, he has struggled against such rivals as Abdullah Mehsud, an Afghan war veteran who had spent time in Guantanamo Bay.

But a February 2005 peace deal with Mehsud appeared to give him room to consolidate and boost his troop strength. Within months of that accord, dozens of pro-government tribal elders in the region were gunned down on his command.

In December 2007, Mehsud became the head of a new coalition called the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, or Pakistan’s Taliban movement. Under his guidance, the group killed hundreds of Pakistanis in suicide and other attacks.

Analysts say the reason for Mehsud’s rise in the militant ranks is his alliances with al-Qaida and other violent groups. U.S. intelligence has said al-Qaida has set up its operational headquarters in Mehsud’s South Waziristan stronghold and neighboring North Waziristan.

Mehsud has no record of attacking targets in the West, although he has threatened to attack Washington.

However, he is suspected of being behind a 10-man cell arrested in Barcelona in January 2008 for plotting suicide attacks in Spain. Pakistan’s former government and the CIA have named him as the prime suspect behind the December 2007 killing of Bhutto, the former Pakistani prime minister. He has denied a role.

___

Munir Ahmad reported from Islamabad. Associated Press writers Elena Becatoros, Nahal Toosi and Zarar Khan in Islamabad, and Pamela Hess in Washington, D.C., contributed to this report.

Source: Yahoo! New Service

UN asked to return Bangladeshi forces

United Nations [UN] has been asked to send back members of Bangladesh Armed Forces and police from the United Nations Peace Keeping Forces [UNPKF].

According to information, one Susan Ramgopalan sent letters to the Secretary General and other officials of United Nations on March 15, 2009 titled ‘Islamist inside UN Peace Keeping Force’, where she referring to the recent statement by Bangladeshi Commerce Minister, Lt. Col. [Retired] Faruk Khan, requested the UN Secretary General to send back all the participating members of Bangladesh Armed Forces and Police in the UNPKF for possible militancy connections.

In the letter, Susan Ramgopalan said, “It has come to my attention that one of the front ranking leaders in Bangladesh’s ruling party, Awami League, member of the Cabinet and Member of Parliament, Lt. Col. Faruk Khan recently told reporters that Islamist militants like Jamiatul Mujuhidin (JMB) has penetrated into country’s border security forces.

”It is noteworthy that officers of border security forces are deputed from country’s armed forces. Under such authoritative statement from a senior member of the Bangladesh government, it is greatly assumed that there are unknown number of Islamist militants even within the other disciplined forces, including army and police.

”United Nations had been welcoming members of Bangladesh Armed Forces and Police for quite some time. But, after the latest statement from the government side, the question of security of continuing services of such elements with militancy ties would not only jeopardize the safety and security of the countries of their activities, but it may even give the militancy linked members of Bangladesh Armed Forces and Police in staging various forms of sabotaging activities in the foreign countries.

”Under such situation, further recruitment of Bangladeshi forces both from army and police should be stopped while an immediate scrutiny should begin to identify the militancy linked members of Bangladesh Armed Forces and Police inside United Nations Peace Keeping Forces and be immediately expelled from such sensitive task.”

It is also learnt that, anti-Bangladesh quarters are actively trying to press forward the issue of militant connection of Bangladesh Armed Forces, Police and other disciplined forces, with the motive of tarnishing the image of the country. They [vested quarters] get specific prove in favor of their allegation, as the Commerce Minister in Bangladesh has repeatedly told this matter to the media as well as some other ministers are also echoing the same information.

“This is a dangerous trend, which will project Bangladesh as a Taliban state to the international community”, said a counter-terrorism experts commenting on the statement of the commerce minister and other members of the present government.

Source: Weekly Blitz

Dhaka should be Obama’s first destination among Muslim countries

Dhaka should be Barack Obama’s first destination among Muslim countries.” This was stated by Ms Lisa Curtis, Senior Research Fellow at the prestigious think-tank the Heritage Foundation, according to a message received here from Washington DC yesterday.

Ms Curtis was speaking as a panelist at a briefing on “Implications of the recent Bangladesh election for business” at the US Chamber of Commerce in Washington DC on Wednesday.

She put forward two main arguments in favour of her proposal. First, according to Ms Curtis, Bangladesh society is least susceptible to extremism as proved in the recently held election. Secondly, progress in women empowerment in Bangladesh has provided a solid check on the growing radicalisation prevalent in some other Muslim countries.

Ms. Curtis also said that economic option seems brighter now than earthier and hoped that there will be more tolerance among the political parties so that they can work together for the people of Bangladesh. She also urged the US government to consider lifting of all tariffs and there by allowing duty free access to products from least developed countries like Bangladesh to USA.

Bangladesh Ambassador to USA Humayun Kabir, who also spoke as a panelist, provided a run down on Bangladesh’s recent election and elaborated on how, compared to other economies in Asia.

The economy of Bangladesh has shown strong resilience and thereby acted as a bulwark for the country’s economy in the face of the current global economic and financial meltdown, he said.

Ambassador Kabir give a detailed sketch on how Bangladesh economy maintained its strong resilience and added that the strong growth in three main areas,—namely internal resource mobilisation, agriculture and manufacturing were attributable for this resilience.

Remittance is also flowing strong and the confidence of the business community is growing, he said adding through all these, Bangladesh has emerged as an attractive destination for foreign investment.

The Ambassador said through the just concluded free, fair and credible election it was eloquently proved that the people of Bangladesh are decisively in favour of democracy and ready to defend it at any cost.

He said that with a new conciliatory political culture emerging, Bangladesh is likely to remain much stable and investor friendly than other countries in the region.
The ambassador highlighted the government’s policy directions with regard to investment and the potential areas for foreign investment in Bangladesh.
Kabir urged the US companies to come forward and take advantage of the investment opportunities in Bangladesh.

Terming present-day Bangladesh as an exciting one, Donal Camp, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, another panelist, narrated on how warmly the government of US welcomed the outcome of the recent parliament election in Bangladesh.

Camp added that this election has upgraded Bangladesh to a new phase and hoped that the new government will assure international businesses and investors through continuity and follow up of earlier contracts and commitments.
He hoped that the opposition would also fulfil their democratic obligations to advance the causes of Bangladesh.

The session was followed by a lively question and answer session, where high officials of leading US companies like chevron, Boeing, Conocophillips took part and wanted to know about the investment opportunities in Bangladesh.

Some participants also cautioned that any departure from earlier commitments may send a wrong signal eroding business confidence in Bangladesh. The briefing was attended by US government officials, business executives, congressional staffs, academics, journalists and Bangladesh Embassy officials, the message added.

Source: BSS

Iran hopes for positive US policy change

Iran promised a positive response on Thursday if the United States makes genuine policy changes and held out hopes of a breakthrough in a long-running dispute over its nuclear ambitions.

Tehran’s comments brought international security to the fore on the second day of the World Economic Forum, which has been dominated by fears over financial instability in the worst global economic crisis in 80 years.

In new signs of the deepening economic woes, Turkey and the International Monetary Fund failed to break an impasse over a loan deal in talks at Davos, and Russian state bank VEB said Russian companies had asked it for $90 billion in aid.

Britain’s Guardian newspaper reported U.S. officials were drafting a letter to Tehran from President Barack Obama aimed at unfreezing relations and opening the way to direct talks.

The U.S. State Department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected in November, the report said. It was a response to a letter of congratulations sent by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after Obama’s victory.

“Most parts of the Islamic world unfortunately have been suffering because of past U.S. administrations,” Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told delegates in Davos.

“If President Obama is determined to change these policies certainly he will face the welcome of the Islamic world.”

He said he hoped the U.S. stance on Iran’s nuclear program would be among Obama’s changes of policy.

Source: Reuters

Turkish PM storms out of Gaza war debate

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan stormed out of a heated debate on the Gaza war with Israel’s President Shimon Peres at the World Economic Forum on Thursday.

In some of the most dramatic moments seen at the normally restrained Davos meetings, Erdogan marched off in front of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and other panel members complaining that his comments on the conflict were cut short.

“I do not think I will be coming back to Davos after this because you do not let me speak,” the prime minister shouted as he left, though he said later he could reconsider.

Erdogan criticised the audience of international officials and corporate chiefs for applauding Peres’s emotional defence of Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, which left more than 1,300 Palestinians dead.

Erdogan, who leads one of the few Muslim countries to have diplomatic relations with Israel and who has sought a peacemaker’s role in the Middle East conflict, said Israel had carried out “barbarian” actions in Gaza.

“I find it very sad that people applaud what you have said because many people have been killed,” he shouted at Peres before being halted by the moderator, Washington Post journalist David Ignatius.

“We can’t start the debate again we just don’t have time,” Ignatius pleaded as he remonstrated with the Turkish premier.

Peres, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994 for his efforts to reconcile with Yasser Arafat’s Palestine Liberation Organisation, had insisted that Israel had been forced into the offensive against Hamas by thousands of rockets and mortars fired into Israel.

“The tragedy of Gaza is not Israel, it is Hamas,” said Peres. “They created a dictatorship. A very dangerous one.”

Pointing a finger at Erdogan he said Turkey would have done the same if rockets had been fired at Istanbul.

Ban, Erdogan, Arab League secretary general Amr Mussa and Peres were sat alongside each other for the debate. All gave long impassioned statements on the conflict.

The UN secretary-general had called on Israel to end its blockade of Gaza, for Hamas to end its violence and for renewed Arab efforts to bring together divided Palestinian groups.

He had earlier launched an international appeal for more than 600 million dollars to buy emergency supplies for Gaza.

Source: AFP

N Korea ditches nonaggression pact with South Korea

North Korea said Friday it is ditching a nonaggression pact and all other peace agreements with South Korea, in an apparent attempt to use the threat of an armed clash to press Seoul to give up its “confrontational” stance.

The communist nation also said it will no longer respect a disputed sea border with the South, raising the prospect for an armed clash along the Yellow Sea boundary - the scene of deadly skirmishes between the two navies in 1999 and 2002.

South Korea said it regretted the North’s latest move and warned it won’t tolerate any attempt to violate the border. Analysts said Pyongyang’s threats could signal it is preparing for an armed confrontation, but only as a way of ratcheting up the pressure on Seoul to get the neighbor to soften its hard-line stance - and attracting President Barack Obama’s attention.

“This signals that North Korea will stage a provocation” - probably near the maritime border, said Kim Yong-hyun, a North Korea expert at Seoul’s Dongguk University.

The isolated regime could then use the threat of an armed clash to pressure Seoul to change course with the North, said Yang Moo-jin, an expert at Seoul’s University of North Korean Studies.

But Kim added that any skirmish would be limited in scale and intensity because Pyongyang is aware that serious deadly clashes would irreparably harm relations with Seoul - and Obama’s new administration, whose attention the North is seeking, he said.

A Defense Ministry official said the military has stepped up vigilance along the land and sea borders with the North. The official, who declined to give his name citing department policy, said more guard posts have been installed along the land border, but could not offer details about what’s been done on the sea border.

Source: AFP

China, India in arms race

A subtle arms race between China and India is going on without any furore anywhere. Pakistan perhaps is in the know of the dangerous development that could imperil all efforts at peace and harmony in the region. China’s supremacy in the region is incontrovertible much to the discomfiture of Washington.

Increasing military spending
The US is not averse to China growing as a major economic mega-power, but Washington would not like to see China building its military muscle as well. So Bush administration encouraged India to beef up its military power to match that of China. China’s military said that it needs to be stronger to face containment abroad stressing Beijing needs to continue to invest more in equipment, salaries, logistics to modernise its army to fend off threats to national unity including separatists in Tibet under the iimplicit inspiration of Dalai Lama and in energy-rich Xinjiang, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
China has been steadily increasing spending on its military to expand its strategic influence in Asia and is beginning to project its power further; a trend that has worried Washington who fear China could emerge as a potential rival power.

US missiles for India
Meanwhile the US is in preliminary talks with India over sale of missile shield systems to help New Delhi guard against nuclear threat. It was not clear the perceived threats are coming from China or Pakistan. The talks got underway during Bush administration.
Indo-US talks have taken place mainly at the technical level. US defence officials had conducted computer simulations with their Indian counterparts to demonstrate the capabilities of such technology, the Financial Times in a recent report cited Pakistan as a potential threat which is Washington’s strongest ally in its war against Muslim insurgency.

Live launches
India experts watched two live launches of missile used in the shield system. The development highlights the fast changing nature of the strategic engagement between Washington and New Delhi after decades of frosty relations. India had so long been doing its military shopping from Moscow.
“India is a partner of ours and we want to provide it with whatever it needs to protect itself. This fits into overall strategic partnership we are building,” FT quoted one US official as saying.
Pakistan is preparing itself to take counter-measures to respond to any Indo-US deal Washington wants New Delhi to be a partner in the process of policing the international system. India will be careful about not acting as proxy for the US.
“India and US are developing joint capabilities that will have net effect of circumscribing the latitude and propensity of China for unilateral action,” FT quoted an Indian defence analyst as saying. India is planning to acquire 126 new fighter aircraft at a cost of $10 billion to replace its ageing Soviet built MiG aircraft.
China says its military budget is purely for defensive purpose adding its defence expenditure has accelerated but it still is a fraction of what US spends. China would soon add aircraft carrier to its naval fleet.
Pakistan can comfort itself with the fact that Hillary Clinton has named three special envoys one will be for Iran, the other for Palestine and Israel and the third one Richard Hallbrook who was US ambassador to UN, will exclusively deal with Pakistan.

Source: Weekly Holiday

China tells United States to handle ties with care

China’s Foreign Minister has urged U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to be careful with sensitive issues that could strain ties, calling the relationship between their two nations one of the world’s most important.

Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi made the remarks to Clinton, settling into her new job as Washington’s top diplomat, in a phone call on Friday, the Chinese Foreign Ministry website (www.fmprc.gov.cn) reported on Saturday.

But Yang’s published remarks did not mention the yuan currency issue, which has become the first test for ties between his government and the new Obama administration.

“The China-U.S. relationship is one of the world’s most important bilateral relations,” Yang told Clinton, according to the report.

Each side should “respect and show consideration for the other’s core interests and appropriately handle differences and sensitive issues,” he said.

The report did not specify those issues, but Beijing considers Taiwan its most sensitive topic in dealings with Washington.

Beijing says self-ruled Taiwan must accept eventual reunification with the mainland and objects to Washington’s military aid to and political support for the island. China has also been angered by U.S. pressure over human rights and Tibet.

Yang, a former ambassador to Washington, said the two powers should “handle bilateral relations by adhering to a strategic high-point and a long-term perspective.”

TRADE DISPUTES

Ties between the United States, the world’s biggest economy, and China, with its bulging exports and foreign exchange reserves, have also been strained by trade disputes that could worsen during the global economic slowdown.

But in the published comments, Yang did not mention the yuan currency exchange policies, which have already become a sparring point between China and the new Obama administration.

U.S. Treasury Secretary-designate Timothy Geithner said on Thursday that China was manipulating its currency to shore up unfair trade advantages.

China’s Commerce Ministry, in a statement to Agence France Presse on Friday, said the Beijing government “has never used so-called currency manipulation.

China’s Foreign Ministry generally avoids wading into trade issues. But the country’s official media were not so reticent.

The China Daily, an English-language paper that often reflects official policy, said Geithner’s position was “a clear move away from the stance of the Bush administration,” which avoided calling Beijing a currency manipulator.

The official Xinhua news agency echoed that view.

“This may signal that with the Obama administration in office, China faces growing pressure from U.S. trade protectionism,” it said, citing Beijing economists.

The People’s Bank of China, the central bank, was preparing a response to Geithner’s remarks, Xinhua said.

The yuan closed lower against the dollar on Friday and traded mostly below the Chinese central bank’s mid-point, with speculation that Geithner’s comments could spark a brief period of modest yuan depreciation.

Source: Internet

History of Guantánamo Bay

The first U.S. presence on Guantánamo Bay was a Marine battalion that camped there on June 10 1898, and the first American casualties of the Spanish-Cuban-American War were two marines killed there the following day.

Five years later, U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt signed an agreement with Cuba’s new government, leasing the bay for 2,000 gold coins per year. The agreement was forced on the new Cuban government through the Platt Amendment, which gave the U.S. authority to interfere in Cuban affairs.

The Lease Agreement signed on February 16 1903, granted the U.S. “the right to use and occupy the waters adjacent to said areas of land and water… and generally to do any and all things necessary to fit the premises for use as coaling or naval stations only, and for no other purpose.”

On July 2 1906, (just before the 2nd U.S. military intervention) a new lease was signed in Havana for Guantánamo Bay and Bahía Honda, for which the U.S. would pay $2,000 per year.

The U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, the oldest existing U.S. military base outside U.S. territory, sits on a 45-square-mile area (117.6 square kilometers) about the size of Manhattan Island.

After the Platt Amendment was annulled in 1934, a new lease was negotiated between the Roosevelt administration and a Cuban government that included Fulgencio Batista as one of three signatories. Batista emerged as the strong man on the island over the next twenty-five years.

When the Revolution triumphed in 1959, the U.S. banned its soldiers stationed at the bay from entering Cuban territory. The Cuban government asserts that Guantánamo should have been returned to Cuba at this time.

“It’s no secret,” wrote Rafael Hernández Rodriquez in Subject to Solution: Problems in Cuban-U.S. Relations, “that the main mission of the naval bases in this area of the Gulf is to control, police and spy on Cuba.”

During a speech in Chile on December 3 1971, Castro said, “that base is there just to humiliate Cuba; just like a knife stuck in the heart of Cuba’s dignity and sovereignty… But from a military standpoint, the base is completely useless.”

On January 11 1985, in a speech during a visit to Nicaragua, Castro addressed the potential use of military violence to recover this territory. “What interest can we have in waging a war with our neighbors?” he said. “In our country we have a military base against the will of our people. It has been there throughout the twenty-six years of the revolution, and it is being occupied by force. We have the moral and legal right to demand its return. We have made the claim in the moral and legal way. We do not intend to recover it with the use of arms. It is part of our territory being occupied by a U.S. military base. Never has anyone, a revolutionary cadre, a revolutionary leader, or a fellow citizen, had the idea of recovering the piece of our territory by the use of force. If some day it will be ours, it will not be by the use of force, but the advance of the consciousness of justice in the world.”

In an interview with Soviet journalists in October 1985, U.S. President Ronald Reagan said that the purpose of the base was political: to impose the U.S. presence, even if the Cubans didn’t want it.

On June 14 2002, at the United Nations General Assembly, Cuba demanded that Guantánamo territory be returned to the island.

The issue of returning Guantánamo to Cuba is complicated by the agreement signed by Batista in 1934. The agreement states: “Until the two Contracting Parties agree to the modification or abrogation of the stipulations of the agreement in regard to the lease to the United States of America of lands in Cuba for coaling and naval stations… the stipulations of that Agreement with regard to the naval station of Guantánamo shall continue in effect.”

To the U.S. this means an “open-ended duration” that can only be terminated by mutual agreement. To Cuba it means that Guantánamo Bay is “occupied territory.”

While this paper will not attempt to enumerate the many legal aspects of international law invoked by this “occupation,” it’s important to note that most other “territories held” throughout the world have been returned. The Panama Canal was returned to Panama in January 2000, Hong Kong was returned to China by the United Kingdom in 1997, and Portugal returned Macau Island to China in 1999.

Since 1959, the U.S. sends a check for the lease amount every year, but the Cuban government has never cashed them.