![]() |
|
|||||||||
|
Bailing Out The Castro Regime?
By Néstor Carbonell
Not unless Communist Cuba makes concrete democratic
changes.
After 50 years of almost continuous antagonism between the U.S. and the Castro-Communist regime, there is a swelling desire in the U.S. and abroad to overcome this predicament through constructive engagement. Since this would not be the first time that engagement has been pursued, let us review the outcome of prior U.S. quests for a rapprochement with this regime, a regime that was expelled from the Organization of American States in 1962 because it had established a Marxist-Leninist tyranny declared incompatible with the inter-American system, had aligned itself with the Soviet bloc and had suppressed all human rights.
Despite a litany of crimes, interventions in the
internal affairs of more than a dozen of Latin American
countries, and threats to the peace and security of the
hemisphere that culminated in the Cuban missile crisis,
President Kennedy tried to seek an accommodation with
Castro. On Sept. 23, 1963, U.S. Ambassador William H.
Attwood secretly commenced negotiations in New York with
the Cuban ambassador to the U.N., Carlos Lechuga.
A few days prior to Kennedy's assassination, a follow-up
meeting was arranged with Castro in Havana. Negotiations
were dropped almost simultaneously because several tons
of war equipment that were shipped from Cuba to
Venezuela's Marxist "Armed Forces of National
Liberation" were uncovered by the local authorities.
In March 1975, Secretary of State
Henry Kissinger announced that the U.S. was "ready
to move in a new direction," which could lead to
normalizing relations with Cuba and the lifting of the
then 14-year-old trade embargo. After almost one year of
intense negotiations between Assistant Secretary of
State William Rogers and Castro representatives, the U.
S. called them off when 15,000 Cuban troops landed in
Angola.
In March 1977, President
Jimmy Carter issued a presidential directive,
stating: "I have concluded that we should attempt to
achieve normalization of our relations with Cuba."
Interest Section offices were established in Havana and
Washington, and a large number of Cuban political
prisoners were released. Hopes for normalization were
quashed when the Castro regime deployed troops to
Ethiopia and, subsequently, unleashed the Mariel
boatlift, which brought 125,000 refugees to Florida,
including over 2,700 criminals and misfits.
President Reagan tried to engage the Castro regime. In
November 1981, Secretary of State Alexander Haig met in
Mexico with Cuban Vice President Carlos Rafael
Rodriguez, and in March 1982, General Vernon Walter
spoke with Castro in Havana. Negotiations stalled when
Castro rejected U.S. trade and other concessions in
exchange for ending Cuban military shipments to Central
American guerrillas.
With the Cold War over, President Bill Clinton actively
pursued constructive engagement with the Castro regime.
He liberalized U.S.-Cuban remittances and travel to the
island (as currently under way), and significantly
expanded people-to-people exchanges. Castro foiled this
quest for a rapprochement with a new rafter crisis in
1994 and when two Cuban MIG jet fighters shot down two
unarmed civilian planes of "Brothers to the Rescue,"
which were flying over international waters in 1996 on a
humanitarian mission.
The above examples of frustrated attempts to normalize
relations with Communist Cuba reflect a pattern of
deception on the part of Castro and his politburo--eager
to obtain U.S. concessions without liberalizing the
regime, feigning a desire to settle differences with the
U.S., yet always scuttling negotiations and resuming
their unyielding and contagious anti-Yankee defiance.
Will this pattern change under the dual or solo
leadership of Raul Castro--the ruthless party hierarch
largely responsible for building the totalitarian
military apparatus in Cuba? He has made conciliatory
overtures to the U.S., yet he continues to harbor
terrorists and support the authoritarian and
expansionist design of his chief subsidizer,
Hugo Chavez, with over 40,000 Cuban agents,
including military and intelligence officers and
indoctrinators, based in Venezuela.
Raul Castro has promised structural changes and open
debate, but there are no signs of glasnost or
perestroika in Cuba; no Chinese-type opening of the
inefficient state-controlled economy; no dismantling of
the apartheid system, which effectively bars the local
population from entering tourist enclaves. A handful of
political prisoners have been conditionally released,
but more than 300 remain in prison under brutal
conditions. Raul Castro has proposed swapping some of
them for the five Cuban spies held in the U.S.
Relying primarily on military comrades from the Old
Guard, the regime is gearing up to quell increasing
discontent and demands for reforms. The dissidents,
now more numerous and vocal than in the past, are
constantly being harassed, and several high-level
government officials, accused of deviationism and
disloyalty, were recently purged and forced to
repent, Stalin-style.
Notwithstanding these developments, there are those in
the U.S. who contend that change in Cuba can be achieved
without prodding, through soft diplomacy. They urge
Washington to stop, rather that sharpen and intensify,
direct support to the dissident movement on the island.
And yet it was strong and sustained support to similar
movements that helped bring about the democratic
transition in Poland and the rest of the Soviet-bloc
countries. Others recommend that the U.S.
unconditionally lift the embargo on Cuba and give up its
levers. That, in essence, is what the
European Union did by dropping its sanctions in the
vain hope that human rights would improve on the island.
Assuming that Washington will pursue a quid pro quo
engagement with the Castro regime, a guarded approach is
called for. The key objective from the U.S. side should
be to pave the way for democracy in Cuba with tangible
steps leading to free elections, and not to prop up the
failed and bankrupt tyranny.
It is a tyranny that is striving to perpetuate itself
through several means. First, by shoring up its standing
with high-level negotiations in Washington and
readmission to regional forums. Second, by harnessing
plenty of dollars from herded American tourists to
supplement Chavez's shrinking petro-subsidies. Third, by
obtaining U.S.-backed credit lines along with access to
international banks and monetary funds to facilitate the
renegotiation or cancellation of its huge external debt
of close to $30 billion, as recently reported by the
Paris Club of creditors.
That is the bailout that the Castro regime is seeking--a
bailout that, without concrete and irreversible measures
for a democratic transition in Cuba, the U. S. must not
support.
Néstor Carbonell is an international public affairs
consultant; author of
And The Russians Stayed: The
Sovietization of Cuba, William Morrow,
1989; and
Luces y Sombras de Cuba,
Ediciones Universal, 2008
Forbes.com
Commentary
04.21.09, 12:30 PM EDT
. |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
. |
||||||||||||||||||||