Who is an enemy?
Emilio Ichikawa. Published Friday, February 16, 2001, in
the Miami Herald
In a fit of political provincialism, a professor once told me that, despite
popular belief, the true cradle of Cuba's national revolutions was not the city
of Santiago but the Law School at the University of Havana.
She was right. Not only that. But even if the cradle in fact were in the
Oriente province, the avenging creatures always end up suckling in Havana.
This applies particularly to the 1959 revolution.
The classicism that underlay many courses taught at that school left a
definite mark on the political imagination of a student who would become the
commander in chief of a lifeless island: Fidel Castro.
His historical imagination is deeply rooted in Greco-Roman antiquity, not in
Cuban or Latin American history. That's why his speeches are larded with
allusions to the battle of the Thermopylae, to Pyrrhic victories, Numancian
self-immolation and assorted Caesars, and why his apocalyptic frenzy has more in
common with a pyromaniacal Nero than an intransigent [Cuban independence hero
Antonio] Maceo.
VILIFIED BY PROPAGANDA
In the course on Roman law, Castro had to learn at least two axioms:
- To achieve political importance, a small nation must look for a big foe --
and for a big friend who can be an enemy of its big foe.
- My foe's enemies can be my friends.
By discursively establishing enmity with the United States (the deluxe rival
selected by Castroism), one can reach a visible level of formal disagreement
that distracts public opinion and allows "secret diplomacy'' to make deals
unrestrictedly in the shadows.
Critics of the American establishment may not know that Castro historically
has offered every guarantee of good behavior toward his neighbors to the north.
He has become a diligent ally -- a little heavy-handed, to be true, but always
willing to serve. His supporters should reconsider their enthusiasm in the light
of such facts.
Faced with this evidence, a shift toward theory is pertinent. Thus, we might
ask: What is an enemy? This issue was raised by Iring Fetscher in his book
Tolerance, which includes the definition, image and actual result of the
friend-foe relationship.
Singular to Castroism is the abyss that separates the formal foe from the
real foe: the enemy from the version of the enemy vilified by propaganda.
The amassed documentation and the increasingly explicit offers of complicity
contradict the assertion that, to Castro, the United States is a radical enemy.
The real enemy of Castroism is the Cuban people. He hates his compatriots both
on the island and in exile with the same intensity; particularly those in Miami,
because they've been able to show what Cubans are capable of doing when living
together in democracy.
At this crossroads in history, with his "enemy'' assured, Castro now is
looking for friends. He proposes pacts and seduces with royalties. Sometimes he
offers concessions that to a businessperson are practically irresistible. That's
something I can understand: Some people are in a hurry and want to gain an
advantage before they participate in the inevitable encounter with the island.
Castro hates Cubans in exile because they've been able to show what Cubans
are capable of doing when living together in democracy.
This is the situation: Why should a man who is notorious for his enmities
insist on searching for alliances, even with the United States and with the
Cuban community in Miami?
Hereafter we shall listen to many proposals for under-the-table deals, never
mind that the discourse is offensive, even foul. Castroism is skilled in the art
of listening, but also has a very long tongue with which to seduce eager and
ingenuous ears.
Beware Fidel Castro, who is just as willing to profit from his enemies as he
is to send his friends to hell. Be aware of history, for Castro can do it again.
Emilio Ichikawa is a columnist for El Nuevo Herald, from which this column
is reprinted.
Copyright 2001 Miami Herald | 