Let
By
Dr. Indira Rampersad Read Spanish Version
indi2304@yahoo.com
From
the Trinidad Sunday Guardian
Cruising
to the Fifth Summit of the Americas (VSOA) in my capacity as both
columnist and an academic who have spent the better part of my life
analyzing the Cuban phenomenon, I was both overwhelmed and secretly
delighted that even in absentia, the socialist isle managed to steal
the show. The summit brought 33 elected leaders to Port of Spain,
Trinidad, between April 17 and 19, many of whom expressed a
groundswell of support and sympathy for the Cuban cause.
For
an entire weekend, Cuba took center stage both inside and outside the
Hyatt Regency Hotel. Indeed, Cuba continued to dominate the discourse
up to the end when it would become the main bone of contention
amongst leaders who refused to sign the Final Declaration of Port of
Spain.
U.S./ALBA
overtures
Even
before the Summit, Cuba was at the forefront of the foreign policy
agenda of several countries including those with divergent ideologies
such as the United States and members of ALBA. Just a week before
embarking to Trinidad, President Obama made good on his campaign
promise to abolish restrictions on family travel and remittances to
the island which had been tightened by the Bush administration in
2004. The ALBA countries which include Bolivia, Cuba, Dominican
Republic, Honduras, Nicaragua and Venezuela, met just one day before
the VSOA at Cumana, Venezuela, and had rejected the Port of Spain
Declaration since Friday, 17th
April, as the ALBA summit ended and the VSOA began in Trinidad. ALBA
decided then, not to endorse the Declaration because it fails to
address the global economic crisis, excludes Cuba and lacks a
regional consensus on demanding an end to the U.S. embargo on Cuba.
The refusal of those countries to sign the Final Declaration of Port
of Spain should have really come as no surprise.
Championing
the Cuban cause
Argentine
President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, the first to speak at the
Summit’s opening session, urged President Obama to lift
Washington’s “anachronistic blockade against Cuba”.
Next,
Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega would also champion the Cuban
cause in a fifty minute diatribe lashing out at the U.S. imposed
isolation of Cuba’s communist regime. “They’re
absent from this meeting… Cuba, whose crime has been that of
fighting for independence, fighting for sovereignty of the peoples. I
don’t feel comfortable attending this summit. I cannot feel
comfortable by being here. I feel ashamed of the fact that I’m
participating at this summit with the absence of Cuba.”
CARICOM
chairman and Belizean Prime Minister, Dean Barrow, then announced
that “We have made it clear at every summit that the formal
inclusion of Cuba into the mainstream of hemispheric affairs remains
a priority for us. We are convinced now that the new U.S.
administration fully understands the need for new approaches in a new
era, which will lead to changes including the lifting of the embargo.
We in CARICOM stand ready to assist in the promotion of the dialogue
between our two neighbors in the complex process of rebuilding a
relationship and reversing fifty years of non-engagement.”
Prime
Minister of Trinidad and Tobago Patrick Manning asserted that “the
Government of Trinidad and Tobago looks forward to the day when Cuba
is fully embraced into the folds of the Inter-American family.”
Venezuela’s
President Hugo Chavez denounced the document as “totally
de-contextualized, as if time hasn’t passed,” and complained
specifically about its characterization of Cuba as non-democratic.
“Where
is there more democracy, in the United States or in Cuba? Who has the
democracy meter? … I have no doubt that there is more democracy in
Cuba than in the United States.”
“I
want to be clear: I want Cuba back in the Interamerican system,”
OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza said. “I think it was a
bad idea in the first place. . . Cuba is a member of the OAS. Its
flag is there.”
Even
after the summit, Cuba was a hot topic, grabbing headlines in several
national, regional and international media. Brazilian President Luiz
Inacio Lula da Silva said he believed U.S. President Barack Obama
would further dismantle the 47-year-old trade embargo against
Communist Cuba. “I know there are cultural and political problems.
It’s not easy to overcome conservative sectors in each country, but
I think Obama will tend to advance and understand there is no more
need for an embargo against Cuba.”
Although
President Obama pledged to seek a “new beginning” in ties with
Cuba affirming that “I do believe that we can move U.S.-Cuban
relations in a new direction,” he is not prepared to put his money
where his mouth is with regard to lifting the U.S. trade embargo on
Cuba. Indeed, any future change in U.S.-Cuba policy would be
conditional, as he insists that “Castro should release political
prisoners, embrace democratic freedoms and cut fees on the money that
Cuban-Americans send back to their families.”
Democratic
power brokers
On
the surface, Obama’s position on Cuba may seem a moral one, but it
may actually be more political as he too panders to U.S. domestic
interests comprising a new configuration of Democratic power brokers
in South Florida and members of Congress. In Washington, both
Democrats and Republicans insist on actions, not just rhetoric, from
Cuba. “Release the prisoners and we’ll talk to you. … Put up or
shut up,” declares South Carolina’s Republican Senator Lindsey
Graham.
Moreover,
powerful right-winged interest groups in the U.S. are not prepared to
tolerate socialism. Even before he returned to Washington, Obama was
facing condemnation from some Republicans about his overtures to
Chavez. Nevada Republican Senator John Ensign encapsulates the
sentiment: “I think it was irresponsible for the president to be
seen kind of laughing and joking with Hugo Chavez.”
Assistant
Secretary General of the OAS, Ambassador Albert Ramdin, assumes a
more pragmatic stance. He affirms that “those who wish a quick
readmission of Cuba to the OAS or other Inter-American institutions
are unrealistic. Cuba’s re-entrance as a member of the OAS will
take more time; it will require a step-by-step, incremental
approach.” He continues that “whatever the approach taken, it
will have to be principled because the adopted Inter-American
democratic charter by 24 member states in 2001 provides only one
measuring stick when it comes to democracy, elections, human rights
and governance…Many speak for Cuba, its people and government, but
it is time to hear from the Cubans themselves!”
Thus,
despite the heightened optimism and conciliatory
stance of the leaders at the summit, further change in U.S.-Cuba
policy and full engagement of Cuba in hemispheric affairs may be much
longer in coming than we think.
Dr.
Indira Rampersad is a Lecturer in Political Science/International
Relations at the Department of Behavioural Sciences, UWI, St.
Augustine, Trinidad, West Indies. Her Ph.D dissertation focused on
U.S. Cuba policy in which she analyzed the anti-embargo movement in
the United States.
