To pick up on one point, about the problematic aspect of such a conference giving advantage to the Cubans, I think the advantage of such a conference, if they agreed to do it, is that it enables Canada not only to talk about our own rights problems internally—we need some improvement, and so on—but obviously it enables us to talk about the Cuban rights problems, as we understand them, as we've heard from witnesses, as we've seen from Amnesty reports or the Committee to Protect Journalists.
It provides a forum for public discussion. The advantage would be the agreement that was almost reached. Of course, this would be in Havana as well as in Ottawa, and you would be able to say all these things in Havana. Now, of course, how much you would see in the Cuban press or media is another question, but the very fact that it is taking place and there's open discussion both there and here is an extension I think, in tough-minded terms, of the principle of having dialogue with the regimes and putting on pressure in terms of rights.
So yes, they may get a certain propagandistic advantage out of having such a conference, and I would say that's great, let them get that bit of advantage, and then you use that to put on more pressure for the implementation of more rights. If they say no to it, then that should be a public part of our diplomacy too, in the sense that if we're calling for this and there's a proposal—the foreign minister is involved in this or our ambassadors—then it becomes knowledge that they said no to it. Anyway, I think from the point of view of people who are concerned about rights and freedom of association, as well as other freedoms in Cuba...I don't want to exaggerate its importance, but it's a real plus to further certain developments.
This was going on in the early 1990s too, the opening up of civil society, and then there was a repression again. This would I think be a plus in helping to encourage that.