A change of heart for The Herald
By
Emilio Paz
First,
the good news. The Miami Herald has come out officially in favor of
an end to the travel and remittance restrictions imposed by
Washington on Cuba.
In
an editorial Wednesday (Nov. 7), titled "More remittances,
travel for a free Cuba," the newspaper states: "The
U.S. government should lift harsh restrictions on travel and
remittances to the island to encourage more people-to-people contacts
and support for Cubans pushing for democracy."
Farther
on, the editorial explains: "More family travel and cultural and
academic exchanges would open a world of information and supportive
contacts for Cubans on the island. More remittances would help
sustain political prisoners as well as Cuban democrats stripped of
jobs."
Now, the
bad news. The Herald makes this bid for all the wrong reasons.
It talks
of "fissures" in the government, exemplified by a statement
ascribed to Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque, to the effect
that Cuba is ready to resign its sovereignty …
By
Emilio Paz Read Spanish Version
First,
the good news. The Miami Herald has come out officially in favor of
an end to the travel and remittance restrictions imposed by
Washington on Cuba.
In
an editorial Wednesday (Nov. 7), titled "More remittances,
travel for a free Cuba," the newspaper states: "The
U.S. government should lift harsh restrictions on travel and
remittances to the island to encourage more people-to-people contacts
and support for Cubans pushing for democracy."
Farther
on, the editorial explains: "More family travel and cultural and
academic exchanges would open a world of information and supportive
contacts for Cubans on the island. More remittances would help
sustain political prisoners as well as Cuban democrats stripped of
jobs."
Now, the
bad news. The Herald makes this bid for all the wrong reasons.
It talks
of "fissures" in the government, exemplified by a statement
ascribed to Foreign Minister Felipe Pérez Roque, to the effect
that Cuba is ready to resign its sovereignty and join "a grand
bloc of Latin American and Caribbean nations."
That’s
twisting the truth. Pérez Roque simply said that Cuba is a
proud member of the Latin American-Caribbean community. He did not
say that Cuba was willing to abandon its national individuality and
become just another victim of Washington’s hegemonistic intentions.
His statement does not — as The Herald said — "contradict
years of nationalistic fervor." On the contrary; it reaffirms
them.
Then,
the editorial comes up with a whopper. "President Bush was
correct in his recent speech on Cuba to encourage Cubans in the
military, police and government to strive for reconciliation and
democratic change," it says.
"Encourage"
Cuba’s army, police and government to "strive for
reconciliation"? What Bush did was to incite those institutions
to revolt and create such an unstable, violent situation that the
United States could be excused for taking over the island as a
protectorate.
"When
Cubans rise up […] you’ve got to make a choice," he told them.
If you choose to overthrow the government, he hinted, "there is
a place for you in the free Cuba." A place for you as well-paid
puppets of the Bush administration, no doubt.
Another
whopper comes next. Bush "should take the advice of experts like
Vaclav Havel and Lech Walesa, […] and most Cuban dissidents,
including hard-liner Martha Beatriz Roque. All push for more
openings, travel and contact with Cuba."
While it
is true that many dissidents have expressed a desire for an end to
the restrictions, Ms. Roque is not one of them. In statements to the
foreign press, she has repeatedly urged Bush to continue to squeeze
the Cuban people until the government collapses. Of course, she can
afford to say that, since she is bankrolled and managed by the Bush
administration through the U.S. Interests Section in Havana.
And I
don’t remember ever hearing Havel or Walesa say that they would like
the blockade to end. Of course, a reopening of Cuba’s trade with the
Czech Republic and Poland would be to everyone’s benefit.
The
Herald’s editorial closes by saying that "after Fidel Castro
dies, Cubans will have a chance to shape their destiny. Opening up to
Cuba now will encourage a transition to freedom."
Wrong
again. Cubans are shaping their destiny at this very moment, as they
go through the national election process. A transition has proceeded
successfully, even as Fidel Castro has turned over his principal
duties to his brother Raúl and other national leaders. It is a
transition within socialism,
not to the "freedom" (read "Plattist neoliberalism")
that Bush would like to impose on the island.
The
editorial’s subtitle is revealing: "U.S. can break the isolation
imposed on the Cuban people." But who imposed that isolation?
Sorry, Herald. Your proposal is good, but your intentions and
reasoning are not.
Emilio
Paz lives in Miami.
