By Susan Brady Konig. .The New York Post. April 5, 2000
THE popular take on the Elian Gonzalez case is that the child is being used as a political pawn. And yet the two biggest politicians in the picture have missed huge political opportunities.
First, there's Fidel Castro. What if, when the boy was found back in November, the Cuban dictator had sent the father immediately to be reunited with his son?
What if, because the boy had just been through the nightmare of seeing his mother die and being lost at sea, Castro had sent not only the dad but all the boy's relatives?
He would have looked like quite the humanitarian instead of the totalitarian oppressor he is. The worst that could've happened would have been for the entire group to ask for asylum in the United States.
It would mean one less family for Castro to control but he could have turned it to his own tyrannical advantage ("Fidel does not want one of Cuba's children to suffer ...").
Think of the effect such an attitude would have on Cuba/U.S. relations.
The other politician is President Clinton, who's not acting very presidential.
As one who is infamous for not exactly following the letter of the law, what if he had said, "Well, I know what the law is but, heck, let's have that little kid come to the White House. I'll intervene with a call to Castro and we'll get him to send the dad on up here tout de suite."
Improbable? Sure. Impossible? Maybe, but with all the stranger-than-fiction moments that have marred this administration, why not? He's still the Leader of the Free World.
What if, in his waning lame-duck days, Clinton made a big pitch for truth, justice and the American way?
It might not make him into Superman but it could serve as a Band-Aid on his legacy -- one that everyone would remember. Maybe our final connection to him could be little Elian instead of Monica.
And while the two leaders do nothing to soften the situation, pollsters are saying the majority of Americans think the boy should be back in Cuba.
Are we collectively and selectively overlooking that Juan Gonzalez does not live in a country where he can hop on a flight any time and come get his boy?
The father has no freedom. We can't be sure that anything he's said or done is the truth and not coerced remarks and actions. After all, he lives in a country where AIDS patients die in concentration camps. Or did we forget about that?
And what of Elian's mom? What if another mother, say 12 years ago, was shot while climbing over the Berlin Wall but managed to drop her young son to the waiting arms of relatives on the Western side?
Would that kid have been sent back to his divorced dad in East Berlin? Doubt it. Why can't we see the 90 miles of ocean between Cuba and Key West as the wide and perilous Berlin Wall they are? Elian's mother died so he could be free.
Obviously, this is not your average custody case. Unless he has no interest in his son, it seems that Juan Gonzalez has not been allowed to travel here for the past four months.
Now he's coming -- but on Castro's terms. It has nothing to do with what works for the father and his son, and everything to do with what works for Castro.
The folks in Little Havana are not a bunch of knee-jerk protesters. They know what they're talking about. They know Castro.
They risked everything to get out of Cuba and into the United States. They know what awaits the boy back home. And so did his mother.
You can e-mail Susan Brady Konig at skonig@nypost.com.
New York Post® |