Freedom House report on Internet Freedom 2015: Cuba passes Ethiopia, but remains "unfree"

Freedom House reported on 65 nations (88% of the world population) in their 2015 Freedom on the Net report, which came out this week. Cuba ranked 61st this year -- only four nations -- Ethiopia, Iran, Syria and China were less free than Cuba. The next lowest Latin American nation was Cuban ally Venezuela, which ranked 45th.

As you see below, the overall freedom index is composed of three sub-indices: obstacles to access, limits on content and violations of user rights:

Cuba's rank improved slightly in each of the sub-indices and, with a total of 81, they moved from 62nd overall to 61st, passing Ethiopia.

Their absolute score on each sub-index also improved (lower scores are best).

While there was slight improvement, Cuba remains the only "not free" nation in the western hemisphere:

For my money, the best part of the Freedom House study is their detailed essays on the state of the Internet in each nation. These essays are organized around the three sub-indices and they are well referenced and go into some detail.

Here is the summary figure from the essay on Cuba:

You will find the essay on Cuba here. Check it out.

-----
Update 10/31/2015

In a post last year, I looked at the 2014 Freedom House report and several other documents to put the Cuban Internet in context. The one sentence summary is that the Cuban Internet lags far behind what one would expect from a nation with Cuba's economy and levels of health and education.

Cuban UN report condemns the embargo -- their telecommunication claims are overstated..

The embargo is one obstacle faced by the Cuban Internet -- the claim overlooks the impact of the Cuban economy and the government's fear of information freedom

On October 23th, the United Nations General Assembly is expected to vote on a resolution urging the United States to end its economic embargo on Cuba.

Last June, Cuba issued a report arguing against the embargo and claiming that it has cost the Cuban people $833.7 billion -- $57,122,900 of that in the sector of "communications and informatics, including telecommunications."

I looked at the telecommunication claims. The first dealt with infrastructure:

In the area of telecommunications, the export of products and services to Cuba has been authorized as well as funding for the creation of infrastructure facilities. Its principal limitation is the requirement of paying in cash and in advance, even when foreign or US banks based outside of the United States are now able to provide financing for these purchases. This is incongruous with international trade practices where this type of payment is not used and companies provide loans to the buyer in order to ensure the sale of their products and services. The possibility of carrying out these operations becomes more complicated because of the banks being worried about making transactions related to Cuba due to the policy of financial harassment applied under the government of President Obama.

I'll abstain from commenting on the financial regulations and customs, because I don't know about them, but I will point out that the US is not the only telecommunication infrastructure supplier in the world. Most notably, China has provided a lot of Cuban telecommunication infrastructure.

The second claim is that the embargo has violated Cuba's right to development:

In the sector of communications and informatics, including telecommunications, there were adverse effects recorded in the period that totaled 57,122,900 dollars. Losses associated with revenues not earned and for the geographical relocation of business of the Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba (ETECSA S.A. for its acronym in Spanish) add up to over 38 million dollars due to the impossibility of accessing leading, high quality brands and/or equipment on the telecommunications market distributed by US entities. For similar reasons, the Cuban firm Copextel, dedicated to supplying and repairing telecommunications equipment, suffered losses of 2.5 million dollars.

The blockade continues to be the principal obstacle to development of infrastructure in Cuba that would allow for improved access to the Internet. The US is the worldwide emporium for informatics technologies and it exercises hegemonic control over the network of networks. Because it is subject to the laws of the Federal Communications Commission and the US Department of State, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICAN) that provides IP addresses and names to the rest of the world is limited in terms of the services it can provide to Cuba.

Despite visits to Cuba of senior Google executives and the marked interest in bringing their products and services into the Cuban market, the blockade still prevents the use of unrestricted services and applications such as Google Chrome, Google Analytics and Google Play Store.

I have several problems with this:

• They say it is impossible to access "leading, high quality brands," but they have done considerable business with Huawei and others. (Cisco will be happy to hear that Huawei is not a leading, high quality brand).
• They seem to believe that the FCC and US State Department have limited ICAN (sic) in providing services to Cuba. I'd like to know which services have been withheld and how removing the embargo would change ICANN's policy.
• US regulations allow Cuban mobile apps to be sold in the Google Play Store (and any other venue), but Google has not yet authorized that.
• Google will; however, list free Cuban apps in the Play Store. More important, the Google executives mentioned above offered (unspecified) free Internet infrastructure to Cuba and the offer was refused. I think it is safe to say that Google, like Huawei, is a world class Internet infrastructure company.

These are relatively specific points, but they are subsumed in the general statement that:

The blockade continues to be the principal obstacle to development of infrastructure in Cuba that would allow for improved access to the Internet.

The embargo is only one obstacle faced by the Cuban Internet -- the claim overlooks the impact of the Cuban economy and the government's fear of information freedom. The impact of the embargo and the poor state of the Cuban economy on the Internet have diminished over time -- I am not sure about government fear.

This will be the 24th annual vote on resolutions calling for the end of the embargo. Last year, only the US and Israel voted no. There has been speculation that the US might abstain this year, since President Obama favors ending the embargo. I wonder how Israel will vote :-).

-----
Update 10/23/2015

The Guardian reports that the US has decided not to abstain from a vote on the resolution because it does not fully reflect the new spirit of engagement between the US and Cuba. Evidently the US asked for revisions that would let them abstain, but the revisions that were offered were insufficient.

I've only looked at the section on telecommunication, but if the rest of the resolution is as far off base as that section, I understand the administrations decision.

The vote is now set for October 27th.

-----
Update 10/27/2015

The vote is in and the resultion condemning the embargo passed by a vote of 192-2. Last year it was 182-2, but this year no nations abstained.

In his remarks, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez acknowledged the new relationship with the United States, but said “the facts show crystal clear” that embargo is still being “fully and completely implemented.”

It is not fair for Rodriguez to claim that the embargo is “fully and completely implemented” since the Obama adminstration has removed meaningful restrictions. Sadly, that sort of one-sided rhetoric -- and the overstated telecommunications claims in the resolution -- is endemic in politics. that's what keeps Factcheck.org in business.

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez at the UN General assembly

Trying to clarify the latest U. S. opening to Cuba -- and failing

One way to get clarification is to offer some Cuban software for sale and see what happens -- in the U. S. and in Cuba.


Last September, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) eased restrictions on trade with Cuba. Restrictions were reduced in many areas -- travel, commercial and financial transactions, support for and remittances to people in Cuba, etc., but the one that caught my eye was an easing of restrictions on telecommunications and Internet-based services, including this statement:

Mobile applications. To further enhance the free flow of information to, from, and among the Cuban people, OFAC is adding a provision in section 515.578 to authorize the importation into the United States of Cuban-origin mobile applications. In addition, OFAC is authorizing the employment of Cuban nationals by persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction to develop such mobile applications.

It sounds like the US government will now allow Cuban programmers to sell mobile apps in the US. (Recall that computer programmer is one of the jobs authorized for self employment by the Cuban government).

Could a Cuban programmer now offer apps for sale in places like the Apple, Google, Amazon and Microsoft app stores?

The new rule leaves several things unclear, so I asked the Treasury department for clarification, as follows:

• Why is the regulation limited to "mobile" apps and how do they define "mobile" app since Microsoft (Windows 10) and Google (Android) are moving to software that can run on a phone, tablet, laptop or desktop PC -- it seems that mobility is a property of the device running the app, not the app itself.
• Can the application be developed for a U. S. business, as opposed to an individual?
• Does the Cuban programmer have to be a self-employed individual (a "cuentapropista") or could the app be developed by a Cooperative or a government enterprise?

Here are the answers:

• The application can be developed for a U. S. business.
• OFAC does not have a definition of "mobile" and, if an individual has a specific question as to whether certain software qualifies for the general license, they can contact OFAC.
• They have no comment on the reason for limiting the ruling to mobile apps.
• They have no comment on the question of dealing with cooperatives or Cuban government enterprises.

I also sent queries to Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Apple asking whether they had plans to offer paid Cuban apps in their online stores and none of them replied.

Cubans are allowed to offer free apps in the Google Play Store, but not paid apps.

During a recent, somewhat frustrating, trip to Cuba, U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker stated that "There is much we in the United States do not fully understand about the Cuban economic system." While I would not want to suggest that U. S. regulations are as hard to understand as Cuba's, this one seems muddy.

One way to get clarification is to offer some Cuban software for sale and see what happens -- in both the U. S. and in Cuba.

-----
Update 10/17/2015

Reader Rodney Hernandez pointed out that there is at least one free Cuban app in the Google Play store, the AlaMesaCuba restaurant guide. The publisher says an iTunes version will be available soon. The FAQs on the Google Play site state that AlaMesaCuba "Has been created and developed by Cubans living in Cuba" and their domain name registrant has a Cuban address and phone number, so Cubans are working on the app.

But there is a US tie as well. The Web site says the app is "offered by" ISLA Management LLC and the "developer" address is that of Inca Investments, a Miami investment firm that specializes in Latin America.

One more thing -- I could not find the AlaMesaCuba app by searching on my Nexus phone, but I was able to install it from the Web site. When I first ran it, it downloaded the current database. I guess the database is maintained in Cuba and updated periodically.

I've never encountered an app that was listed online, but not on my phone before -- is that common? Does it have something to do with fuzzy regulations?

-----
Update 10/22/2015

I've got two Cuban apps on my phone now, AlaMesaCuba and KickRajoy. KickRajoy is written by a Cuban living out of the country and AlaMesaCuba is written by programmers living in Cuba, but distributed with the help of people in the US.

Both are free, but KickRajoy has ads at the bottom of the screen. I assume that the programmer gets a portion of that ad revenue. Does AlaMesaCuba generate revenue in fees for listings? Have their US partners paid the developers as an investment?

Are there other apps being sold in the US with payments going to Cuba? Note that Cubans are now allowed to write apps for companies and clients -- they do not have to be in Google's store or anyone elses.

-----
Update 10/29/2015

There is a discussion of this post at Slashdot.

The Chringadecuba blog has been suspended.

In July, 2012, blogger Carlos Alberto Pérez moved his blog from Wordpress to his own domain chiringadecuba.com because he worried about the possibility of Wordpress censorship.

Ironically, his Wordpress blog is still online, but Chiringadecuba.com has been suspended:

There has been online speculation that this may have been the result of an imperialist maneuver, doubting that Cuba could suspend a dot.com account, wondering whether Carlos Alberto had paid his registration bill, etc.

It turns out that the server is still reachable and running, but it just serves up an old fashioned CGI script and the name registration has been paid through next June. I spoke with Baruch College Professor and Cuba scholar Ted Henken who has learned that the Web hosting company has suspended the server due to a denial of service attack. Henken suspects that the attack may have been orchestrated by the government of Cuba in retaliation for leaked documents that have been posted on the blog. (I've spoken with someone at the datacenter where the blog is hosted, but have not heard back from the hosting company).

If the government did execute a denial of service attack on Chiringadecuba, I would be extremely disappointed. Carlos is not subversive -- he is a conscientious critic, stating "I don't criticize to knock the system down. On the contrary, I criticize to perfect the system."

(Pérez has been offering constructive criticism from the start. In his first post he described ten municipal workers with a truck who had the "job" of clearing fallen leaves from a street).

As Henken points out, the thaw in US-Cuban relations and the growth of digital civil society on the island gives the Cuban government an opportunity to demonstrate that it can tolerate constructive critics and to learn from them. I hope to see Chringadecuba soon.

-----
Update 10/15/2015

Chringadecuba is back online!

-----
Update 10/23/2015

After a short time online, Chiringadecuba was hit by another DDoS attack and taken down. Plans are being made to move it to a better protected site. It will be back -- stay tuned!

-----
Update 10/30/2015

Chringadecuba is back online at a different hosting site. Hopefully, this one will be able to withstand a DDoS attack if another one occurs. The archived posts are still not reachable, but we are working on it.

-----
Update 11/2/2015

I hope this is the last update I have to write to this post. The Chiringadecuba blog has been fully restored -- the archives are now back online.

Chringadecuba was running on a server in Montreal, Canada when it was attacked, as shown in this log excerpt:

The blog has been moved to a new, secure host, the post archive has been restored and blogger Carlos Alberto Pérez is posting again.

It is no secret that Cuba is controversial -- the government has both staunch supporters and severe critics. Ironically, the attack on Chiringadecuba could have been done by people on either side. Pérez supports the government and therefore he is willing to criticize it. As he has said "I don't criticize to knock the system down. On the contrary, I criticize to perfect the system."

A Cuban scholar once told me that knew he was doing his job well when both sides were angry with him. I guess Chiringadecuba is doing a good job.

-----
Update 11/7/2015

It looks like there may be a new attack on Chiringadecuba. Checking the cPanel log for 30 minutes yesterday there were 866 HTTP calls in the thirty minutes between 17:11:13 and 17:41:53. They ranged in size from 0-7,263,988 bytes, with an average size of 74,190 bytes. (298 were empty). The majority were page GETs.