Fidel’s Final Hurrah
The news coming out of Havana suggests that Fidel Castro might be in his final hours. The Spanish newspaper, El Pais, reports that the 80 yr old Castro is in “very grave” condition after three failed intestinal operations.
When and if Fidel checks out, you can immediately add Cuba to the list of Bush administration foreign policy crises.
If you think this administration can’t tell heads from tails or Sunnis from Shia in Iraq, just wait until we can measure its ignorance on real-life Cuba.
This month’s edition of Foreign Affairs magazine carries a prescient and well-argued piece by Cuban affairs scholar Julia Sweig. She argues that the smooth transfer of power from Fidel Castro to a future regime began last summer when El Comandante removed himself from daily exercise of power, turning the reins over to brother Raul.
But, she says, the White House has been unable to respond to the new situation because of the accumulated effects of treating Cuba as primarily a domestic and not geopolitical issue. The American intelligence community has rendered itself “breathakingly” isolated from Cuban realities and, therefore, completely unprepared for the shift already underway:
“But if consigning Cuba to domestic politics has been the path of least resistance so far, it will begin to have real costs as the post-Fidel transition continues — for Cuba and the United States alike. Fidel’s death, especially if it comes in the run-up to a presidential election, could bring instability precisely because of the perception in the United States that Cuba will be vulnerable to meddling from abroad. Some exiles may try to draw the United States into direct conflict with Havana, whether by egging on potential Cuban refugees to take to the Florida Straits or by appealing to Congress, the White House, and the Pentagon to attempt to strangle the post-Fidel government.
Washington must finally wake up to the reality of how and why the Castro regime has proved so durable — and recognize that, as a result of its willful ignorance, it has few tools with which to effectively influence Cuba after Fidel is gone. With U.S. credibility in Latin America and the rest of the world at an all-time low, it is time to put to rest a policy that Fidel’s handover of power has already so clearly exposed as a complete failure.”
I’m rather less sanguine than Sweig about what turns are in the offing within Cuba itself. I suspect the immediate future will be considerably bumpier than she predicts. But her overall point about the cluelessness of U.S. policy is well-taken. Make sure you read her entire report.
January 16th, 2007 at 5:09 am
I wonder if US policy towards Cuba during the last 50 years as much cluelessness as deliberate. If you wanted to see very cynical and sinister motivations behind the US government attitude, it would be the fear that a truly democratic but also socialist Cuba would be the worst possible model for US capitalist hegemony in the hemisphere–just as Chile was, which made the Pinochet coup so compelling to the Nixon administration. The Cubans are never going to go for laissez-faire, American style capitalism on their island, so despite all the lip service to fostering democracy US policy has been almost deliberately designed to provide the Castro regime with a good excuse to keep the lid on. As we all know, or should, no one in America got worked up about democracy in Cuba until the Batista dictatorship was overthrown. And of course Castro’s style of Stalinist leadership has made the job all the much easier for the US.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Considerably bumpier, I’d bet the ranch on it. I’m sure the hair on the back of Cheney’s neck is standing up. Will these neocon madmen conclude that some outright aggression in the name of democracy will lift thier dismal polls and distract the public from Iraq?
Bush & Co. are clueless but they sure love starting wars.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:16 am
This could well be an unsubstantiated US hoax, or it could be real.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:27 am
Cummings,
The report is coming from El PaÃs, Spain’s leading newspaper and a strong critic of the Bus administration.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:35 am
Just make Cuba a state already. And pray some of the Gitmo guests haven’t blended into the countryside.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:35 am
As I said, I am not saying I disbelieve it on principle. I am saying that it is unsubstantiated, and fits the pattern of US disinformation – ESPECIALLY because it is a paper critical of US actions. I am about 50/50 on this one.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:44 am
I got moderated with my first try, giving it another shot so apologies if double posted:
I wonder if US policy towards Cuba during the last 50 years as much cluelessness as deliberate. If you wanted to see very cynical and sinister motivations behind the US government attitude, it would be the fear that a truly democratic but also socialist Cuba would be the worst possible model for US capitalist hegemony in the hemisphere–just as Chile was, which made the Pinochet coup so compelling to the Nixon administration. The Cubans are never going to go for laissez-faire, American style capitalism on their island, so despite all the lip service to fostering democracy US policy has been almost deliberately designed to provide the Castro regime with a good excuse to keep the lid on. As we all know, or should, no one in America got worked up about democracy in Cuba until the Batista dictatorship was overthrown. And of course Castro’s style of Stalinist leadership has made the job all the much easier for the US.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:56 am
For me, “Fidel” died when he supported the Soviet invasion of Chechslovakia…
As for the question of transition, hasn’t it pretty much already happened ? And as regards our being hobbled by “the Cuba lobby” via Florida’s electoral leverage, with the resulting damage to any diplomatic or intelligence expertise related to the island, isn’t that about the oldest news in the world ? I guess it’s a positive that these issues are being chewed on in a mag like “Foreign Affairs” but when you think about how obvious and beyond their expiration date these realizations are, one can only be appalled. This period “post-Fidel” would be, from my grumpy pragmatist perspective, the most opportune time to have a Republican realist regime stateside to re-craft a bi-partisan Cuba policy – Nixon to China and all of that.
Can any such thing happen ? Call the grumpy pragmatist a dreamer. I don’t want to give the BushCo bastards – nor most of the Dems – a pass on this with “the incompetence dodge”, but you’ve really got to wonder how they manage to tie their shoes.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:14 am
I’d like one of the “Lefties” here to explain to me how according to their Good Book or whatever, nearly forty years after the failure of Quevarism, with the region overwhelmingly consumed by electoral struggles rather than guerrilla war, and Cuba an absolutely stunning trade and investment opportunity – granted with a shitty human rights record, but probably no worse than Egypt’s, better than China’s and certainly better than that of the regime young Americans are dying to install in Iraq (and we all know HR is nothing but a bogus talking point with these BushCo sleazeballs to begin with) – how exactly does keeping Cuba isolated serve any concievable interest of the Big Boys who actually rake in the bucks from U.S. global reach ?
It increasingly looks like a combination of retro-ideologues – crackpots, really, who have created a sizeable industry for themselves on the Beltway planet – and ethnic ward politics packing a national punch that keeps this crazy policy afloat.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:23 am
Sanctions should have been lifted years ago, something only a Republican could have pulled off.
I too read the Foreign Affairs aryicle. Besides being a little irked by the insistance on calling Mr. Castro “Fidel,” I think it overstated the regimes popular support, just as the stability (and prosperity) of the German Democratic Republicwas always overstated. When “official” wages are $20 a month, obviously most people are surviving outside the law.
That said, what do you think they’re do with the carcass? I don’t really see him pumped full of formaldehyde, lamenated, and put on display. But there will surely be some sort of deification.
January 16th, 2007 at 10:56 am
“I am saying that it is unsubstantiated, and fits the pattern of US disinformation – ESPECIALLY because it is a paper critical of US actions. I am about 50/50 on this one.”
50/50? Because it’s unsubstantiated? Any report regarding information like this will be hard to substantiate due to Cuba’s police state conditions. I guess we’ll have to wait and see what Granma reports. Or because it fits the pattern? Which pattern are you talking about? A recent pattern of disinformation regarding Castro’s health? I agree that the US goverment is certainly not above pushing disinformation onto the public. It has done it, probably is doing it in some cases, and certainly will do it in the future. But in THIS CASE, the report sounds likely to be true given what has been substantiated about Castro’s health (many, many years of unhealthy habits, given up only just recently, required major gastrointestinal surgery forcing him to hand over power, etc…)
I think a far more realistic number would be 80/20. Skepticism is a good thing, but only if applied in all directions.
By the way, maybe a bit off topic, but I’m just curious what odds you’d give to the notion that instead of trying to quell the rising violence (insurgency and sectarian) in Iraq, the US is actually fomenting it. I won’t totally discount this, but i certainly put it well below 50/50. Some Lefties that I know are beyond any serious discussion of Iraq now, because they cut me off with this smug pronouncement. I’m aware that this belief is strong and is only growing in those circles. I’m wondering where Naomi Klein is at now. Maybe you can tell me (or if any other self-described ‘Lefty’ cares to). Does she believe this? Does she still support the insurgency then? How can she still be in bed with evil imperialists? Surely there are some other truly valiant and revolutionary groups that should be supported. Hezbollah maybe?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Naomi Klein, who’s done more in a few years than most activists do in a lifetime, is working on a book right now. I fail to see, beyond how Klein drew parallels between what even Hitchens and other warmongers acknowledged was a popular uprising by Sistani to push the US into allowing elections, and the protests at the republcan convention over two years ago, “Najaf to New York,” etc. Klein never supported the insurgency, as such. But then, she actually has done some work of consequence, unlike Mr. McC right here.
50/50 is a fair way of being skeptical “in all directions” Otherwise I write off the above commenter as a provocateur. What the hell have you done for social change, John?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:32 am
Remember when the Soviet Union fell and the “Smart Money” said Cuba would fall in a year or so? Didn’t happen. So I think we should all take the predictions of what will happen in a post-Castro Cuba with the small small mountain of salt. I agree with Reg that, on a scale of human rights violators, Cuba was a a lot better than many and worse than others and, in things like education and public health, a lot better than most Latin countries. And I think that MB is right that the real problem that Cuba presented was an alternative economic model that threatened US hegemony in the region. The fact that Castro was, in many ways, an old fashioned Caudillo, was a happy bonus for US policy makers as it made it possible for them to clothe their concerns in psuedo-Human Rights language when the real issue was the uncompensated nationalisation of American property.
I have no doubt that the neocons would jump at this and the Miami “Last Standers” will want a crusade to “Liberate” the island and we’ll see see end of Spanish speaking Achmed Chalibis. But the only saving grace is we are a country weary of foreign adventures and a tapped-out treasury. We’ll make trouble but at this point, frankly, Chavez has more resources to engage Cuba with than we do.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:37 am
From CNN/Dr. Sanjay Gupta’s blog:
I always find the news gathering at CNN to be remarkable. In Spain, we have reporter Al Goodman, who chased down leads all day, eventually contacting a doctor who has examined Castro, and who denied the Spanish newspaper’s report.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:47 am
What has shaped the present US policy toward Cuba? Simple: You can’t win Florida’s electoral votes without the support of the Miami Cubans.
And what do the Miami Cubans expect in return after Castro passes? Simple: Cuba. They want repatriation and the return of their land and property in Cuba that was “illegally” confiscated by the Castro regime.
And, of course, there are all those potential tourist dollars to be harvested.
How do you spell “Ahmed Chalabi” in Spanish?
BahÃa de Cochinos anyone?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:54 am
Well maybe Michael Ledeen will confirm.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:56 am
Ifail to see the greater significance of the accuracy of predicting fidel’s actual state of health.
The reason we don’t know is because the cuban dictatorship has deemed it a state secret.
I am confident that the bush admin would at this point prefer that the castro bros stay in charge so as to not have to deal with the disruption of a possible rupture. Both governments need each other to justify their own failed policies.
Btw. I saw the CNN report. Goodman’s doctor hasn’t seen Fidel in weeks and is not privvy to the latest. The doctor is in Spain. Fidel is in cuba. Why the disbelief that he actually may be dying?
January 16th, 2007 at 12:41 pm
JC, I never have purported to be some dynamo of social activism, and I certainly don’t need to show my ‘progressive’ or ‘lefty’ credentials to anyone in order to question them on a statement that they made in a blog forum. My point was that I just don’t see any reason to be as dismissive as you are about the report, and then I linked your attitude to the disturing and growing trend amongst the far left of paranoid obsession with US power (a trend, in my belief, that is harmful to social activism).
January 16th, 2007 at 2:28 pm
Explain this paranoid obsession, and how it has had a detrimental effect on activism….
Also, what has been good about US power for humanity, ever?
January 16th, 2007 at 3:34 pm
WWII
January 16th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Who knows what the maniacs in the Bush Administration “Think?” Maybe they would see it as a welcome diversion from Mess-O-Potamia and a way to buck up the base.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:27 pm
America entered WW2 too late, and mainly out of pressure from the anti-fascist movement, and to protect investments. Unlike Brits, Canucks or Russians, the Americans idd nothing to liberate death camps. They also had intelligence on traintracks to death camps and did nothing about them, and protected US corporate assets in Germany….and then empowered Nazi and Fascist colloborators after the war. Yes WW2 was just, but the US’s role was murky.
January 16th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
Americans idd nothing to liberate death camps
One wonders which is worse: your tendentiousness or your ignorance of the facts:
A lot of this was a matter of geography: the worst camps were in the east: Auschwitz, Treblinka, etc. Nevertheless, you are wrong on the facts.
January 16th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Don’t know if you’ve ever been there, but you should make a visit to Dachau sometime. In fact, everyone should visit Dachau some time in their life.
January 16th, 2007 at 9:15 pm
I actually have been to most of the camps. I went on a “march of the living” trip when I was seventeen. It contributed greatly to my thinking. I concede being incorrect – but stand by the broader point that American policy – and in particular after the war not letting in Jewish refugees – was not motivated by saving the victims of fascism.
January 18th, 2007 at 7:46 am
If you visited the camps, then surely you would have known the history of the liberation of Dacau, especially the part about the American troops making the town residents see what had been going on under their noses as well as having them clean it up.
Indeed, one would imagine that you would find another opportunity to bash the US, given the summary executions committed by US troops of some of the camp guards in reaction to the horror of what they saw.
January 18th, 2007 at 10:04 am
“Bash the US”….Even if we have disagreements, M. Paul, you are too intelligent to simply put it that way. I actually did not visit Dachau, the trip was focused on Eastern camps. However, I have no problem with the US summarily executing Nazis.
January 18th, 2007 at 10:26 am
Sorry, should have put an emoticon in
I would have a problem with the summary execution of anyone at times of war; summary execution being that without judicial procedure. If the Nazis had done that to US troops, it would be considered a war crime.
BTW,
It took me all of 30 seconds to find the reference on Google to Dachau, granted, that my memory of my visit helped. Perhaps you might find it salutary to first check your facts before making a statement that “Americans did nothing to liberate death camps.” By so doing, perhaps you can avoid accusations of bashing the US.
January 20th, 2007 at 9:58 am
Its not US bashing to point out that hte US had no interest, as policy, in saving Jews and other victims of Hitler and fascism. They did everything they could to not allow Jews to come to America, hence creating a problem that was taken advantage of by the Zionists.
Yes, summary executions are a war crime. Between the US hiring Nazis post ww2 and EAst Germany and USSR hanging them, I certainly prefer the latter, war crime or not.
January 20th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
It is US bashing when you make shit up out of whole cloth like when you made your initial statement that “Americans did nothing to liberate death camps.†If you knew half the facts that you claim about the camps you would have known about Dachau and would have known not to say easily refutable nonsense.
East Germany and the USSR hanging them? Not all of them. How do you think the Soviets built the R-1?
January 28th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
I think Cuba will prosper. Even if FC dies within next hours,days or months.Who cares.I think Cuba will beat USA financialy one of this days.God will help Cubans to get out of the poverty.
June 20th, 2007 at 6:42 pm
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! phnwwruylaxlht