**Biodiversity **

Module – Overfishing

US Cuba cooperation is key to sustain biodiversity – the alternative results in ecosystem degradation and overfishing PR Newswire 13 (“United States Scientists Visit Cuba to Discuss Overfishing, Coral Reefs, Ocean Energy and Ocean Issues”,http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/united-states-scientists-visit-cuba-to-discuss-overfishing-coral-reefs-ocean-energy-and-ocean-issues-65763572.html, 6/24/13, AZ)

RALEIGH, N.C., Oct. 23 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Environmental Defense Fund will send a team of experts to Havana, Cuba, on Sunday to discuss ways to eliminate overfishing, protect coral reefs, conserve coastal areas, and tap potential ocean energy - a signal that greater environmental cooperation may be on the horizon. EDF scientists and policy experts and Cuban scientists and environmental officials will have a series of meetings about how the United States and Cuba can work together to protect ocean waters and marine resources shared by the two countries. The meetings come on the heels of a September visit to the United States by Cuban environmental officials.¶ "The United States and Cuba share many ecological resources, but the countries have different ways of managing them," said Daniel Whittle, a senior attorney at EDF and director of its Cuba Program. "Fishing, coastal development, and offshore oil and gas exploration in Cuba can have impacts in the United States, and vice-versa. The sooner we work together to manage shared resources and find solutions common problems, the sooner we'll see benefits for the people, the environment and the economy in both countries."¶ EDF has asked the Obama administration to ease policies that limit scientific exchanges between U.S. and Cuban scientists and conservation professionals. Last month the U.S. State Department issued visas for four Cuban environmental officials to attend scientific meetings hosted by EDF in Washington, DC, and Sarasota, Florida--the first such meetings held in the U.S. in several years.¶ "These precedent-setting meetings are a hopeful sign that greater environmental cooperation is on the horizon," said Dr. Doug Rader, chief ocean scientist for EDF. "An important first step toward managing our shared marine resources is to share good science and good ideas. We have a lot to learn from each other."¶ Rader added that expanded scientific and management cooperation can help address the growing threats to coral reefs, ocean fish populations, habitats for migratory birds, marine mammals and turtles, and biodiversity.¶ Just 90 miles from the tip of Florida, Cuba shares a large amount of ocean territory with the United States. Because of the prevailing currents and Cuba's proximity, preserving its marine resources is critically important to the economies of coastal communities in both countries.

Overfishing kills food securityKoster, operator of overfishing.org, 2011(Pepijin, 2/1/2011, “Why is Overfishing a Problem?” Online: http://overfishing.org/pages/why_is_overfishing_a_problem.php FG)In the first chapter we already discussed that globally fishing fleets are at least two to three times as large as needed to take present day catches of fish and other marine species. To explain why overfishing is a problem we first have to get an idea on the scale of the problem. This is best done by

looking at some figures published by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization. 1 The FAO scientists publish a two yearly report (SOFIA) on the state of the world's fisheries and aquaculture. 2 The report is generally rather conservative regarding the acknowledging of problems but does show the key issue and trends. Due to the difficulty of aggregating and combining the data it can be stated that the SOFIA report is a number of years behind of the real situation. 52% of fish stocks are fully exploited 20% are moderately exploited 17% are overexploited 7% are depleted 1% is recovering from depletion The above shows that over 25% of all the world's fish stocks are either overexploited or depleted. Another 52% is fully exploited, these are in imminent danger of overexploitation (maximum sustainable production level) and collapse. Thus a total of almost 80% of the world's fisheries are fully- to over-exploited, depleted, or in a state of collapse. Worldwide about 90% of the stocks of large predatory fish stocks are already gone. In the real world all this comes down to two serious problems. We are losing species as well as entire ecosystems. As a result the overall ecological unity of our oceans are under stress and at risk of collapse. We are in risk of losing a valuable food source many depend upon for social, economical or dietary reasons. The single best example of the ecological and economical dangers of overfishing is found in Newfoundland, Canada. In 1992 the once thriving cod fishing industry came to a sudden and full stop when at the start of the fishing season no cod appeared. Overfishing allowed by decades of fisheries mismanagement was the main cause for this disaster that resulted in almost 40.000 people losing their livelihood and an ecosystem in complete state of decay. Now, fifteen years after the collapse, many fishermen are still waiting for the cod to return and communities still haven't recovered from the sudden removal of the regions single most important economical driver. The only people thriving in this region are the ones fishing for crab, a species once considered a nuisance by the Newfoundland fishermen. It's not only the fish that is affected by fishing. As we are fishing down the food web 3 the increasing effort needed to catch something of commercial value marine mammals, sharks, sea birds, and non commercially viable fish species in the web of marine biodiversity are overexploited, killed as bycatch and discarded (up to 80% of the catch for certain fisheries), and threatened by the industrialized fisheries. 4 Scientists agree that at current exploitation rates many important fish stocks will be removed from the system within 25 years. Dr. Daniel Pauly describes it as follows: “The big fish, the bill fish, the groupers, the big things will be gone. It is happening now. If things go unchecked, we'll have a sea full of little horrible things that nobody wants to eat. We might end up with a marine junkyard dominated by plankton.”

Food shortages lead to World War IIICalvin, theoretical neurophysiologist at the University of Washington, 98(William, Atlantic Monthly, January, The Great Climate Flip-Flop, Vol 281, No. 1, 1998, p. 47-64, 6-31-13)

The population-crash scenario is surely the most appalling. Plummeting crop yields would cause some powerful countries to try to take over their neighbors or distant lands -- if only because their armies, unpaid and lacking food, would go marauding, both at home and across the borders. The better-organized countries would attempt to use their armies, before they fell apart entirely, to take over countries with significant remaining resources, driving out or starving their inhabitants if not using modern weapons to accomplish the same end: eliminating competitors for the remaining food. This would be a worldwide problem -- and could lead to a Third World War -- but Europe's vulnerability is particularly easy to analyze. The last abrupt cooling, the Younger Dryas, drastically altered Europe's climate as far east as Ukraine. Present-day Europe has more than 650 million people. It has excellent soils, and largely grows its own food. It could no longer do so if it lost the extra warming from the North Atlantic.

Ext – Enviro Coop K/

US –Cuba cooperation is essential on the environment – top environmental groups sayNewhouse 12 – Center for International Policy Cuba delegate, NatGeo editor and publisher, and member of the Cuba Advisory Group(Elizabeth, “The U.S. Must Work With Cuba on the Environment”, http://cipcubareport.wordpress.com/2012/02/17/the-u-s-must-work-with-cuba-on-the-environment/, 6/24/13, AZ)

It should be an article of faith that the environment is immune from U.S. politics where U.S. interests are clearly at stake. That’s mostly the case with other countries, but not with Cuba. In New York last week a workshop organized by The New York Botanical Garden (NYBG) highlighted this aberration—and its damaging effects. Participants included a number of key non-governmental groups, such as the Environmental Defense Fund, the Nature Conservancy, the Wildlife Conservation Society, and the Mote Marine Laboratory. They strongly agreed that measures must be taken to make it easier to cooperate on the environment with Cuba.¶ Cuba and the United States, whose territorial waters meet in the Gulf of Mexico and the Florida Straits, have much in common ecologically, as Brian Boom of the NYBG pointed out in his paper “Biodiversity without Borders,” (PDF). This shared biodiversity ranges from threatened ecosystems, such as coral reefs and mangrove forests, to thousands of migratory species, including the Monarch butterfly, the Atlantic bluefin tuna, and the Hawksbill turtle. Many species have economic value and others are seriously endangered; still others are invasive and highly disruptive, while others carry serious disease like dengue fever. All of them require ongoing study and monitoring.¶ Even more urgent, natural disasters (hurricanes) and man-made threats (oil spills) can cause enormous damage that call for rapid bilateral solutions. The recent start of oil exploration off Cuba’s north coast points up the compelling need to prepare for a spill—and for the harm that will be done to the marine environment even without one.¶ However, between the U.S. and Cuba there exists no governmental cooperation on the environment as on much else. In 2007, Wayne Smith and CIP determined to work around this vacuum by organizing a conference in Cancun, Mexico, of key Cuban scientists and environmentalists and a group of their U.S. NGO counterparts (Conference report is here). The group, the first of its kind, agreed on priorities for research and conservation in the Gulf of Mexico and set up an organization to establish the gulf as a model for protection. The organization, now including Mexico and called the Trinational Initiative, plans to hold its fifth meeting this year.¶ CIP’s initiative and other subsequent workshops and conferences have helped ease the way for environmental NGOs to work in Cuba. It is still far from easy, however. While visas for scientists and others to go and come are much more available under the Obama administration, tough procedural obstacles exist in both countries. These include obtaining licenses for people and equipment, funding limitations due to the embargo, and difficulties in securing project approvals, permits, and research visas from the Cuban government.¶ As Brian Boom’s White Paper concluded—and workshop participants vehemently agreed—the ecological stakes urgently call for a government-to-government accord that will allow professionals to work together on the critical environmental issues that extend beyond boundaries. Nature knows no nations!

Ext – Government K/

Government to government collaboration key to solving the environment – empirically provenBoom, Director of the Caribbean Biodiversity Program, 12 (Brian M. Boom, September 2012, “Biodiversity without Borders: Advancing U.S.-Cuba Cooperation through ¶ Environmental Research,” Science & Diplomacy, Vol. 1, No. 3 (September 2012*). ¶ http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/article/2012/biodiversity-without-borders. Accessed June 24, 2013, RJ)Nature knows no boundaries, and given the number and scale of environmental ¶ problems shared by Cuba and the United States, combined with the multitude of ¶ impediments to finding joint solutions to these problems, the best way to enhance ¶ environmental cooperation between the two countries would be through the ¶ establishment of a bilateral agreement on this theme. ¶ The ecological stakes are too high for Cuba and the United States to rely on ¶ anything short of a government-to-

government accord to formalize, catalyze, and ¶ facilitate cooperation on environmental problems of mutual concern. Various ¶ models for such an agreement exist: the United States has joint statements on ¶ environmental cooperation with Spain and Italy, an agreement on air quality with ¶ Canada, and a memorandum of understanding on environmental protection with ¶ India, among others. ¶ Such a bilateral agreement could logically take advantage of the collective ¶ experiences of the U.S.-based environmental NGO community in conducting ¶ collaborative initiatives with Cuban counterparts over many years and, in some ¶ cases, decades. The focus of such a bilateral agreement should be on helping to ¶ facilitate the activities by NGOs that are currently underway and encouraging new ¶

initiatives by NGOs in consultation with and the approval of Cuban authorities. ¶ The elements of such an agreement should take into account the difficulties ¶ mentioned above and the following considerations:strengthened Castro’s economic hold on the country. “The International Trade Commission has estimated that, in the absence of sanctions, U.S. exports to Cuba would grow to more than $1 billion. Meat exports from the U.S. could be as much as $76 million, while wheat exports could be as much as $52 million.”12 Yet, since 2005, new obstacles imposed by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) have made the flow of U.S. wheat, corn, soy, powdered milk, and poultry more unreliable, costing U.S. companies $100 million in deals that Cuba made with firms in other countries.13 In the aftermath of OFAC’s maneuvers, Members of Congress say “Rice sales have fallen by 43% by value and the value of dairy also fell 43%. Apple exports have fallen by 64% by value, while the value of cotton sales declined 55%. The value of our poultry exports has fallen by more than 19%, while wheat sales have fallen nearly 14%. These lost U.S. sales are being made up by our competitors.”14 As American agricultural sales fell, a November 2005 agreement – worth $20 million – lifted Canadian wheat sales to Cuba to their highest level since 1990. The sale of 100,000 tons of Canada Western Red Spring was the largest single sale to Cuba since 1997. The embargo bars oil exploration by American firms; this is especially harmful now, as Cuba is encouraging exploration in off-shore blocks in 1,660 square miles of its waters in the Gulf of Mexico. India’s largest staterun petroleum exploration firm won the rights to search for oil in these waters.15 Cuba’s state oil company also signed an agreement with Spain’s Repsol YPF, Norway’s Hydro, and India’s OVL in May 2006 for the exploration of its six offshore blocks. Venezuela’s state-owned oil company will also join in oil exploration in Cuba’s north coast. According to Senator Larry Craig (R-ID), agreements like these could mean “forever closing the door on those resources to the U.S. industry.”16 Bilateral trade between China and Cuba reached $777 million in 2005, $560 million of which were Chinese exports cnbv Cuba.17 Chinese appliances and transportation services are flooding into Cuba. The Financial Times reports “Cuba’s ports are being revamped with Chinese

equipment, in part to handle the millions of Chinese domestic appliances that began arriving last year. Cuba is turning to Chinese rather than Western companies to modernize its crippled transportation system at a cost of more than $1 billion.”18 Cuba has purchased 100 locomotives from China for $130 million,19 1,000 Chinese buses for urban and interprovincial transportation,20 and 30,000 Chinese refrigerators.21 The Brattle Group reports that an end to travel restrictions to Cuba would lead to increased demand for air and cruise travel to the region. Without restrictions, it is estimated that U.S. economic output would “expand annually by $1.18 billion to $1.61 billion. This expansion would create from 16,888 to 23,020 new jobs.22

Cooperation between US and Cuba is proven to solve the environment – current partnerships proveWaitt Foundation 13 – institute dedicated to protection and conservation of oceans and marine resources(“CUBAN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE”, http://waittfoundation.org/cuban-environmental-science, 6/24/13, AZ)

EDF’s work to protect important shared marine resources in the U.S. Southeast, the Gulf of Mexico and Caribbean depends upon close working partnerships with world-class — but under-resourced and little-known — Cuban environmental scientists. A biodiversity hotspot, Cuba has regionally important marine and coastal ecosystems. With connectivity to the United States, the window of opportunity is now to share our resources and to work together towards solutions.¶ Over the past 12 years, and with a special license from the U.S. Department of Treasury, EDF has built strong relationships with Cuban environmental institutions and Cuban environmental scientists, who are among the best educated and most experienced in the region. Cuban scientists’ rigorous research has informed important environmental policy initiatives, including the Cuban government’s decision to include 25% of the insular shelf in marine protected areas (MPAs). The current 108 MPAs represent the following:¶ - 15% of the Cuban insular shelf - 16 fish spawning sites¶ - 35% coral reefs - 31% seagrass beds¶ - 27% mangroves¶

However, because of inadequate funding and other constraints on research, field work in Cuba has been limited and much remains unknown about critical issues such as overfishing, the benefits of MPAs, and ecosystem vulnerability to changing ocean conditions. These gaps in knowledge hamper the development of sound environmental policy and effective fisheries management.¶ Project Goals¶

With support from the Waitt Foundation, EDF is launching a new initiative in 2013, led by Dan Whittle, to support collaborative field research with scientists from Cuba’s Center for Marine Research. This initiative will enable teams of Cuban and American scientists to carry out a series of two- to four- week research cruises aboard the Cuban research vessel Felipe Poey and will support year-round port sampling of shark landings in at least four Cuban ports.¶ The overarching project goal is to generate scientific research that can inform sound policy to improve the performance of fisheries and MPA networks. Specific objectives are to:¶ 1. Facilitate Cuban environmental scientists’ research and promote international awareness of Cuba’s high-quality marine science.¶ 2. Collect biological and ecological data essential to the management of sharks and selected reef fish.¶ 3. Assess the biological, ecological and socioeconomic performance of existing Cuban MPAs.¶ 4. Characterize the socioeconomic contribution of fisheries and MPAs to the economy.¶ 5. Use research results to inform conservation and management strategies.¶ Field Expertise¶ Daniel Whittle directs EDF’s work to advance conservation of marine and coastal ecosystems in Cuba. He works with Cuban scientists, lawyers and resource managers to identify and implement collaborative strategies for fisheries management, coral reef conservation,

and sustainable coastal development in Cuba and the region.¶ For the last decade, Whittle has been collaborating with Cuban fishermen, scientists and environmental officials on ways to protect shared resources like fish and marine mammals. Operating under a special license from the U.S Treasury Department, he’s also working to ensure that the right safeguards are in place for projected oil development off Cuba’s northwest coast.¶

Cooperation is key to preserving marine environments – affects US economy and natural habitatsEnvironmental Defense Fund 12 (“U.S. and Cuba seek common ground”, http://www.edf.org/oceans/us-and-cuba-seek-common-ground, 6/24/13, AZ)

Vast untapped reserves of “black gold” are thought to lie off Cuba’s north shore—enough, experts say, to wean the country from its dependence on Venezuelan oil imports. This year Spanish oil giant Repsol plans to begin exploratory drilling in deep waters 50 miles off Key West, and foreign oil companies from Russia, Malaysia, Brazil, India and Venezuela, among others, are lining up behind them.¶ For the United States, Cuba and Mexico, the risks of drilling in deepwaters of the Gulf of Mexico are enormous. Experts warn that a large spill in Cuban waters could be more catastrophic than the BP disaster, given the three countries’ sensitive marine ecosystems.¶ The problems could be compounded by delays in getting the expertise and state-of-the-art technology needed to deal with a large, deepwater accident. U.S. policy restricts American companies from working with Cuban enterprises to protect the waters we share.¶ Can environmental concerns bridge the political gulf?¶ “For half a century, a political gulf has divided our two countries,” says EDF’s chief oceans scientist Doug Rader. “It is time for a pragmatic approach that would help Cuba prepare for the worst, while developing a strong foundation for our shared environmental future.”¶ Over the past decade, Cuban environmental lawyers have been developing regulations for offshore oil and gas drilling that include strict oversight. During the BP oil spill crisis in 2010, EDF’s oceans staff provided regular updates to Cuban environmental officials to help them assess what damage might occur to the island’s ecosystems and coastal communities.¶ Luckily, oil from the BP blowout did not wash onto Cuban beaches. But given prevailing currents and winds, neither country may be as fortunate next time around. EDF urges that the United States begin a dialogue with the Cuban and Mexican governments on oil and gas drilling in the Gulf.¶ The National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill recommends that international standards be developed and specifically that “it is in our country’s national interest to negotiate now with these near neighbors to agree on a common, rigorous set of standards [and] a system for regulatory oversight…”¶ Tapping clean energy to reduce oil imports¶ As part of a national strategy to gain energy independence and reduce global warming pollution, Cuba also hopes to develop cleaner sources of energy. In 2008, at the request of our Cuban partners we organized an international symposium on ocean energy to explore ways to develop this largely untapped source without harming the environment.¶ Cuba provides good conditions for a variety of ocean energy options—including wind and current—and may prove ideal for ocean thermal energy conversion. As with any large-scale technology, building and operating energy facilities may pose risks to marine life and habitat. Sensitive ecosystem —such as coral reefs and mangroves, and important nursery and rookery areas for fish, marine mammals, seabirds and sea turtles—must be protected.¶ “With good standards and policy in place, Cuba could be a model for clean energy development in the Caribbean,” says Dr. Rod Fujita, EDF senior scientist and director of Ocean Innovations.¶ Fostering further cooperation¶ Cooperation is as critical to U.S. interests as it is to Cuba’s. Cuban waters provide vital spawning and nursery grounds

for snapper, grouper and other commercially important reef fish in the United States. Cuba is also the major stopover point on migration routes to and from South America for most of the familiar songbirds along the U.S. East Coast.¶ And the two nations quite likely share a recently discovered deepwater coral ecosystem that extends north to North Carolina. “Though the United States and Cuba share many ecological resources, we have different ways of managing them,” says EDF attorney Dan Whittle, director of our Cuba program. “Fishing, coastal development, and offshore oil and gas exploration in Cuba can have huge impacts on the United States and vice-versa.”¶

AT: Cuba’s Environment is Fine

Cuba needs outside help to solve environmental problemsConell, Research associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, 9(Christina, “The U.S. and Cuba: Destined to be an Environmental Duo?“, http://www.coha.org/the-us-and-cuba-an-environmental-duo/, 6/25/13, AZ)

¶ Beginning Concerns¶ The environmental degradation that began during the colonial era has transcended time as a result of Castro’s political and economic paradigm. Only in the last 40 years, with the development of the Commission for the Protection of the Environment and the Conservation of Natural Resources (COMARNA), has Cuba begun to address growing environmental concerns. COMARNA consolidated all of the agencies with environmental responsibilities, as a step towards giving them the power to influence all environmental issues. Although COMARNA was all-inclusive, it lacked independent authority, so its activities achieved few tangible results. The sad fact was that the centralized agency only succeeded in aiding the state in squandering resources.¶ In reality, establishing the agency was a modest concession to ease environmental concerns, but the truth lingered that Cuba’s wealth of natural resources remained under the auspices of the government. COMARNA acknowledged the appeals for conservation by the international community, yet it allowed for the misuse of natural resources by the State. By way of example, the centralized Cuban agency built thousands of miles of roads for the development of non-existent state agricultural enterprises and dams where there was hardly any water to contain.¶ In 1981, Cuba enacted Law 33 in an attempt to legitimize their environmental laws and regulations, yet Law 33 played only a miniscule role in guiding the extraction of natural resources and the conservation of ecological life on the island. Lauded as a law ahead of its time, Law 33 purportedly covers all the regulations concerning the environment and the protection and use of Cuban national resources, even though it produced few results.¶ The statute includes a section comparing the “wise use of natural resources by communist countries versus the indiscriminate use of natural resources by the capitalistic world.” In this regard, the document is more a piece of political propaganda than a law meant to be rigorously enforced. Moreover it palls in comparison to international environmental protection guidelines and has relatively limited significance within the country since the Cuban government is responsible for the operation of the bulk of the industries and is therefore the principal polluter and consumer of natural resources. Thus Law 33 exonerates the Cuban government from enforcing stricter conservation standards by making a system that looks efficient, but in reality may not be so. A closer analysis on Law 33 exposes its inherent lack of efficacy and applicability.¶ Attempts to Move Forward¶ In 1994, Cuba developed the Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment (CITMA) in order to absorb the tasks of the unproductive COMARNA. CITMA attempts to steer the implementation of environmental policy, the rational use of natural resources, and the adoption of sustainable development programs. Law 81 developed out of the necessity to give the Ministry a more sharply defined role in the government by replacing the outdated Law 33. Law 81, the Law of the Environment, was enacted in 1997 and presents a comprehensive framework law that covers all aspects of the environment ranging from air, water and waste, to historic preservation and coastal zone management. Although it details inspections and an enforcement plan, the law is ultimately ineffective due to its overarching nature, which makes it difficult to enforce. Law 81 may replace a necessary revision of Law 33; however, it remains vague in its enforcement procedures. For example, Law 81, Article 81 states that national resources will be used in accordance with the provisions that “their rational use will be assured, for which their quantitative and qualitative continuity will be

preserved, recycling and recovery systems will be developed, and the ecosystems to which they belong safeguarded.” This portion of the provision elucidates the ambiguous nature of the law, as it continues to delineate objectives without coming up with specific implementation strategies.¶ In 1997, the Earth Summit, a conference sponsored by the United Nations aimed at aiding governments in rethinking economic development and finding ways to halt the destruction of irreplaceable natural resources and pollution of the planet was held in New York. At the Summit, Cuban officials were refreshingly blunt in acknowledging the environmental degradation present on their island. In a pamphlet distributed at the conference, the Havana government stated that “there have been mistakes and shortcomings, due mainly to insufficient environmental awareness, knowledge and education, the lack of a higher management demand, limited introduction and generalization of scientific and technological achievements, as well as the still insufficient incorporation of environmental dimensions in its policies. The authorities also pointed to the insufficient development plans and programs and the absence of a sufficiently integrative and coherent judicial system,” to enforce environmental regulations. After the Earth Summit, Cuba designed and implemented a variety of programs, administrative structures, and public awareness initiatives to promote sound environmental management and sustainable development. Although the conference spurred motivation in environmental matters, Cuba still lacked the economic resources needed to support its share of environmental protection responsibilities due to the loss of its financial ties with the former Soviet Union.¶ The Earth Summit came after the fall of the Soviet Union and the tightening of the U.S. blockade against Cuba in 1992, which resulted in a 35% retrenchment of the Cuban GDP. The Special Period, referring to the cut off of economic subsidies that had regularly come from the former Soviet Union, witnessed a decrease in many environmentally damaging activities both by choice and by necessity. The end of aid from the Russia also resulted in many decisions aimed at resuscitating the Cuban economy. The economic crisis increased pressure to sacrifice environmental protection for economic output. Although development slowed due to economic concerns, the island’s forests were particularly overworked for firewood and finished wood exports. However, the crisis also provided the impetus for pursuing sustainable development strategies. The principle motivating such change has been a realization that if Cuba does not preserve its environment, it will, at the very least, lose its attraction to tourists.¶

Cuba – US environmental cooperation allows Washington to brand itself as eco-friendlyConell, Research associate at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs, 9(Christina, “The U.S. and Cuba: Destined to be an Environmental Duo?“, http://www.coha.org/the-us-and-cuba-an-environmental-duo/, 6/25/13, AZ)

Diverging Views¶ Unlike the U.S., which still has never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, Cuba signed the document in 1997, which calls for the stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the global climate system. This legally binding international agreement attempts to tackle the issue of global warming and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S., although a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, has neither ratified nor withdrawn from the Protocol. The signature alone is merely symbolic, as the Kyoto Protocol is non-binding on the United States unless ratified. Although in 2005 the United States was the largest per capita emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, it experienced only a modest decline of 2.8 percent from 2007 to 2008. This decline demonstrates that the U.S. has the framework to reverse Cuba’s substandard environmental track record. By aiding Havana, Washington would be able to brand itself as an active conservationist. Such a label would enable the U.S. to create a valuable ecological

public image in the international arena.¶ The developmental assistance and economic growth potential that might stem from a U.S.-Cuba partnership might aid in developing enforceable implementation strategies. Even though Cuba’s written regulations characteristically lack feasible, implementable standards. Cuban laws, currently in effect, do provide a foundation for greater conservation activity in the future. The Cuban government does show an interest in encouraging sustainable development initiatives in the future, yet its laws are all based on maintaining a centralized government featuring a command economy. For example, CITMA appears to be trying to affect change, but many aspects of Cuba’s bureaucracy are rooted in the past and it remains difficult to update the ways of an outdated administrative substructure. If the embargo is lifted without a robust partnership and plans for environmental sustainability, the invasion of U.S. consumerism may seriously damage the island.¶