Cuba: A New Start?

Dont know if this has been posted elsewhere, but it merits repeating. From the Miami Herald, via the Centre Daily Times:

A new start for Cuba

BY OSCAR ESPINOSA CHEPE

HAVANA — The complete absence of Fidel Castro from the military parade of Dec. 2 commemorating the 50th anniversary of his landing on the island and from other official events honoring him early this month marks the start of a new era for Cuba.

It becomes clearer that the man now in power in Cuba is his brother Raúl, who has the support of the armed forces that he has led for almost five decades. The problems that Raúl inherits are severe. In particular, there is a loss of spiritual values among the citizenry and the fact that the political credibility of the authorities has been severely eroded by years of scarcity and unmet promises. Even in education, public health and social security, where there had been relative progress, there is a marked deterioration of conditions.

The situation is not much better in foreign affairs. The country’s political and economic isolation has become acute, with unreliable relationships with Third World countries and a reliance on Venezuela to sustain the Cuban economy with its oil.

Notwithstanding his undeniable historic prominence, Gen. Raúl Castro does not have the charisma and political stature of his older brother, as he himself has acknowledged. With a country in shambles that’s facing political, economic and social problems, the new leader has to chose between two options: to continue doing nothing or to initiate a reform process that will raise the standard of living of the population and will allow Cuba to join the international community.

• The first option, by keeping the lid on Cubans’ entrepreneurial capacity, would have dire results for the country. It has already been officially noted there is evidence of a rampant growth in corruption. This, along with growing poverty, could provoke a social explosion in which all Cubans would be the losers and that would even have a destabilizing influence on neighboring countries.

• T he second option — reform — would entail the implementation of economic measures that could eventually lead to longer-range political changes. It can certainly be said that if long-suppressed productive forces were liberated, there would be satisfactory results in short order.

On Dec. 2, Raúl Castro raised expectations when he signaled his government’s willingness to negotiate the normalization of relations with U.S. authorities on the basis of mutual respect. Notwithstanding, any negotiation, whether with the United States or with Europe, would necessarily have to include a measure of good faith.

In the first place would be freeing political prisoners — who are being held in subhuman conditions. This would not entail any danger to the Cuban government since these are nonviolent people whose interest is not to destabilize the nation. To liberate them would be a positive gesture that the world would acknowledge. Another step would be the ratification by Cuba of the International Treaty of Political and Civil Rights and the International Treaty of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which most countries around the world have signed.

The United States could also take steps to promote confidence and trust toward eventual negotiations. One such would be the elimination of restrictions on family visits by Cubans on both sides of the Florida Straits, another the strengthening of academic, cultural, artistic and sports contacts between the two countries.

Undoubtedly, along with the problems, the new government inherits a legacy of ideology from which it cannot divest itself, even if it wanted to, for reasons of legitimacy. Fidel Castro has been a decisive factor in Cuban history for the last 50 years during which he has held almost absolute power.

The choices for a new direction in government are clear: Stay the course, or implement reforms that will lead to a prosperous, democratic reconciliation for the nation.

Oscar Espinosa Chepe is an independent Cuban journalist in Cuba.

I emphasized that paragraph as it is the key to any negotiation withe the Cuban government. If political prisoners and prisoners of conscience are not released, en masse, then any dealings with the Cuban Government are a de facto acceptance of Cuba’s treatment of dissidents.

2 thoughts on “Cuba: A New Start?”

  1. Hello,

    This is my first comment, let me introduce myself as a supporter of US/Cuba Negotiations, thus I am also always looking for current discussions on what those parameters might be.

    While surfing the web today, I couldn’t help but notice that Mr.Chepe’s letter was posted here, and I wish to thank Babalublog for doing so.

    But, most of all I am curious about how Mr. Prieto interprets this letter.

    As anyone can see, the bold highlighted paragraph does stress the importance of respecting international law. Mostly because it defends the rights of unlawful detentions, specifically prisoners of conscience.

    Yet, the following paragraph also reminds us that the US also has certain obligations in the same respects, because it too is a signatory to the aforementioned international treaties.

    My interpretations of this letter, unlike Mr. Prieto’s, are that both US and Cuba have equal responsibilities in forging a settlement, for grievances that cross our borders.

    In this sense, it seems reasonable to think that the US must also take a step forward, of the sake of Cuba’s political prisoners.

  2. BEWARE OF WOLVES IN SHEEP CLOTHING!

    “HAVANA — The complete absence of Fidel Castro from the military parade of Dec. 2 commemorating the 50th anniversary of his landing on the island and from other official events honoring him early this month marks the start of a new era for Cuba.”

    The king (castro) is dead long live the king (raul) Beware… Mr. Espinosa will now very subtly begin the selling of raul castro!

    “It becomes clearer that the man now in power in Cuba is his brother Raúl, who has the support of the armed forces that he has led for almost five decades. The problems that Raúl inherits are severe. In particular, there is a loss of spiritual values among the citizenry and the fact that the political credibility of the authorities has been severely eroded by years of scarcity and unmet promises. Even in education, public health and social security, where there had been relative progress, there is a marked deterioration of conditions.”

    Excuse me! raul castro does not INHERIT any problems that he did not HELP create, and in case no one has noticed… He was been in power these last 47 years working in tandem with you know who. And please, please, please… Do tell about what relative progress he refers to? Mr. Espinosa points out the conditions Cuba finds itself NOW so that he can validate the rest of this article.

    “The situation is not much better in foreign affairs. The country’s political and economic isolation has become acute, with unreliable relationships with Third World countries and a reliance on Venezuela to sustain the Cuban economy with its oil.”

    We all know the castro bros. have lost all credibility with their creditors due to the billions of dollars it now OWES to half the world. As far as I’m aware the world idolizes the Cuban regime so the ONLY political isolation Espinosa must be speaking of is that of the United States. “OJO” this is the audience he’s targeting… By the way, now that mini me has won the elections “Venezuela will continue to sustain the Cuban economy with its oil” No matter what!

    “Notwithstanding his undeniable historic prominence, Gen. Raúl Castro does not have the charisma and political stature of his older brother, as he himself has acknowledged. With a country in shambles that’s facing political, economic and social problems, the new leader has to chose between two options: to continue doing nothing or to initiate a reform process that will raise the standard of living of the population and will allow Cuba to join the international community.”

    Why is charisma an issue here? And quite frankly, the opposition would never refer to raul as a General nor bother to mention in any article that the last 47 years of raul castro as Maximum General of the armed forces were of “undeniable historic prominence.” Au contraire mes amis, they would call him for what he really is… a murdering butcher like his brother!

    In case no one noticed, raul castro has THREE options… Why didn’t Mr. Espinosa touch on number three? Marta Beatriz Roque, Oscar Elias Biscet, Darsi Ferrer and others have called for democracy for Cuba minus the castros and their goons. Why I ask, is Mr. Espinosa willing to accept raul?

    “• The first option, by keeping the lid on Cubans’ entrepreneurial capacity, would have dire results for the country. It has already been officially noted there is evidence of a rampant growth in corruption. This, along with growing poverty, could provoke a social explosion in which all Cubans would be the losers and that would even have a destabilizing influence on neighboring countries.”

    I would ask Mr. Espinosa where he’s been these past 47 years. What has changed? Corruption and poverty has been the way of live for Cubans since the castros took power. What destabilizing influence does he speak of? Is this a veiled threat? Is he trying to threaten the United States with a possible mass exodus if relations between the two countries don’t begin soon?

    “• The second option — reform — would entail the implementation of economic measures that could eventually lead to longer-range political changes. It can certainly be said that if long-suppressed productive forces were liberated, there would be satisfactory results in short order.”

    Here my dear friends he suggests the Chinese Model for Cuba! Notice he mentions the “implementation of economic measures that could EVENTUALLY lead to LONGER-RANGE political changes. Yeah, Right!

    “On Dec. 2, Raúl Castro raised expectations when he signaled his government’s willingness to negotiate the normalization of relations with U.S. authorities on the basis of mutual respect. Notwithstanding, any negotiation, whether with the United States or with Europe, would necessarily have to include a measure of good faith.”

    This is the meat of his whole argument! REMOVE THE EMBARGO! Normalize relations with the United States. A clean slate if you will. Open a new line of credit for Cuba, open Cuba to American tourism and investors and turn Cuba into a new “China.” Forget human rights, forgive those that have committed crimes against humanity, forget those that were tortured and murdered, forget those that died in the Paredón, forget those that spent their youth in Cuban jails, forget those that died without ever going back to the land of their birth. Forgive those that brought Cuba to ruin. Not ME not EVER. Cuba needs justice not a clean slate.

    “In the first place would be freeing political prisoners — who are being held in subhuman conditions. This would not entail any danger to the Cuban government since these are nonviolent people whose interest is not to destabilize the nation. To liberate them would be a positive gesture that the world would acknowledge. Another step would be the ratification by Cuba of the International Treaty of Political and Civil Rights and the International Treaty of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which most countries around the world have signed.”

    Freeing political prisoners means NOTHING if the Totalitarian regime that incarcerated them is STILL in place! Someone should tell Mr. Espinosa that Cuba is a signatory of all the aforementioned treaties. They have never honored them why should we trust them now?

    “The United States could also take steps to promote confidence and trust toward eventual negotiations. One such would be the elimination of restrictions on family visits by Cubans on both sides of the Florida Straits, another the strengthening of academic, cultural, artistic and sports contacts between the two countries.”

    Up to a couple years ago there WAS PLENTY of “strengthening of academic, cultural, artistic and sport contacts between the two countries.” It was stopped because IT WAS ONLY ONE SIDED. Cubans came to the U.S. but only those APPROVED by the Cuban government could go to Cuba. The only academics allowed were those with LEFT-leaning tendencies.

    “Undoubtedly, along with the problems, the new government inherits a legacy of ideology from which it cannot divest itself, even if it wanted to, for reasons of legitimacy. Fidel Castro has been a decisive factor in Cuban history for the last 50 years during which he has held almost absolute power.”

    Obviously Mr. Espinosa doesn’t have a problem with communist/socialist ideology. Whatever does he mean by the new government INHERITS a legacy of ideology (hello! this is raul’s only ideology he doesn’t inherit it he helped to implement it) from which it cannot divest itself (why not? what is keeping raul for opening up free elections à la Pinochet?) even if it wanted to for reasons of legitimacy (what! what pray tell, is legitimate about this totalitarian government?)

    “The choices for a new direction in government are clear: Stay the course, or implement reforms that will lead to a prosperous, democratic reconciliation for the nation.”

    Thank you Mr. Espinosa, but no thanks! You may call yourself an independent Cuban journalist BUT THAT IS ALL! You are not a member of the opposition or even a dissident. In my book when you want the same things the Cuban government wants you are on their side.

    DON’T YOU EVER WONDER WHY THE OPINION OF CUBAN INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST THAT WANT TO END THE EMBARGO ARE THE ONLY ONES THAT EVER COME TO PRINT IN THE U.S.?

Comments are closed.