|
Jaime Suchlicki.
The Miami Herald,
May. 08, 2002.
Jimmy Carter's May 12-17 visit to Cuba is paved with uncertainty and perhaps
failure.
Few people question the former president's intentions: He wants to improve
Cuba's abominable human-rights conditions, open a dialogue between the United
States and Cuba, and eventually move toward normalizing relations between the
two countries.
Carter opposes sanctions and favors tourism, trade and investment as means
to ''open up'' the Castro regime and accelerate a transition toward democracy in
Cuba. Yet it takes two to tango.
Fidel Castro has been the most steadfast totalitarian for the past 43 years,
jealous of his power and convinced that his ideas are on the right side of
history. Since the 1997 Fifth Communist Party Congress in Cuba, Castro has been
more concerned about succession, while avoiding transition. He anointed his
brother Raúl as heir to the dynastic throne of Cuban power, gave his
military unparalleled control over the Cuban economy, and emphasized a virulent
and mobilizational form of nationalism and anti-Americanism.
For Castro, the future of ''his'' revolution is best served by a domestic
anti-American posture with no political or economic openings and a foreign
posture in support of the most radical anti-American regimes: Iran, Iraq and
China. During the past few years, he has tightened relations with these regimes
while gradually moving away from Western democratic countries.
It is in this context that we have to understand his spat with Mexico and
Uruguay and other Latin American countries. The recent United Nations vote
against his regime in Geneva was the last straw in Castro's anger. He sees
little support or future in his relationship with a Latin America that demands
changes in Cuba and is unwilling to provide financial credits for his strapped
economy. Only Venezuela under Hugo Chávez, which is providing subsidized
petroleum to Cuba, or a future Brazil under Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva are
important for Cuba.
Naturally, normalizing relations with the United States under Castro's terms
-- no concessions or changes in exchange for a unilateral lifting of the travel
ban and the embargo -- would be most welcomed by Cuba's leadership. Castro would
like American tourists and credits, which will have little political impact on
his tightly controlled society.
But without the travel ban and the embargo, what is the United States left
with to negotiate with a future Cuban regime? Giving away unilaterally an
important tool of U.S. foreign policy would weaken U.S. leverage to move Cuba
into an open society. Lifting the embargo now would strengthen Castro's state
enterprises and perpetuate their existence, making a true transition more
difficult.
Carter will have to face these harsh realities. Also, he'll be facing an
old, obstinate, intransigent and defiant leader who is unwilling to change or
let his revolution be subverted by ''Yankee imperialism'' and willing to cast
his lot with the most totalitarian, anti-American nations.
Many others have tried and failed to influence Castro, among them: Pope John
Paul II and the former presidents of Mexico, José López Portillo;
Venezuela, Carlos Andrés Pérez; and Spain, Felipe González
and José María Aznar. The Canadians and Europeans have been
engaged with Castro for 43 years, with very little to show regarding human
rights and freedom in Cuba.
Unfortunately not all issues and problems in international relations can be
solved through negotiations. The deck seems stacked against Carter. Let's hope
he can succeed where many others have failed.
Jaime Suchlicki is Emilio Bacardi Moreau professor of history and
international studies and director of the Institute forCuban and Cuban-American
Studies at the University of Miami. | 
