|
By Manny Perez. .
The Miami Herald, Feb.
21, 2003.
A recent report by the Center for
National Policy makes some recommendations on U.S. policy on Cuba. While the
central premise is sound -- that a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba is
in the interest of the United States -- the report contains many misconceptions
and misguided recommendations.
Chief among them is that Cuba no longer poses a threat to the United States
because communism has disappeared as a major force from the world stage. In
fact, with communism no longer a viable banner, Fidel Castro has turned to
alliances with anti-American states and terrorist movements of every stripe such
as Libya, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Colombia's FARC and ELN, Puerto Rico's
Macheteros and Spain's ETA. It is profoundly nave to think that Castro no longer
poses a threat to the United States and would not become an even greater threat
given more resources.
The report quotes a poll that found that ''45 percent of Cuban Americans
think that the embargo has not worked.'' But it fails to mention that, as The
Herald reported, the same poll finds that ''61 percent [of Cuban exiles] still
support the U.S. economic embargo.'' Such omission is unfortunate and puts in
question the report's objectivity.
The possibility of another balsero crisis is presented in the report as
motivation for a softer line toward Castro. Such balsero blackmail has been used
by Castro, with some success. However, bending to such blackmail by totalitarian
regimes is an ill-advised policy, as we are now finding out vis--vis North Korea
and its nuclear program.
Strong resolve quickly will neutralize this threat. We saw that last year
when Castro again threatened to unleash the balseros. This time, Gov. Jeb Bush,
no doubt with a nod from the White House, declared that such an action would be
considered an act of war against the United States. The next day the Cuban coast
guard was in full force patrolling the north coast of Cuba.
The idea of engaging Cuba in conversations is fundamentally sound. Such
engagement must focus on reducing the level of fear on the part of the ruling
elite while eliminating any hope of legitimacy or survival without democratic
reforms. Unfortunately, the specific recommendations are a mixed bag.
The suggested moratorium on rhetoric is sound. The United States should
state that it has no intention of using military power against Cuba as long as
U.S. security interests are not threatened. But it also should declare that the
United States considers the Cuban regime illegitimate as long as the regime
continues to violate the people's human rights and that no normalization of
relations is possible as long as that situation endures.
Concurrently, the Cubanexile community should develop a stance on
confiscated properties that ideally offers people on the island some security.
It also should express its position on crimes committed that should be long on
forgiveness and reconciliation but not clean the slate.
Rather than removing all U.S. travel restrictions unilaterally and
completely, this should be done gradually and in exchange for corresponding
liberalization on Cuba's part. U.S. travelers should be informed of the
human-rights conditions in Cuba and on how to encourage civil society, for
example, by donating books and staying with Cuban families and not in
tourist-apartheid hotels. Any travel liberalization should be reversible,
subject to Cuba's actions.
The suggestion of cooperating on counter-terrorism or anti-drug efforts,
where Cuba is implicated, is patently absurd.
Finally, we should pause on the most monumental fallacy in the report, that
the Cuban regime ''has a right to assert its sovereignty.'' The authors should
note that the sovereignty of the Cuban nation resides with its people. As long
as the people are stripped of their political rights, the Cuban regime has no
legitimacy, sovereignty or rights.
Manny Pérez is a software entrepreneur in Miami.
U.S.
- Cuba Realtions: Time for a New Approach (PDF file) | 
