Washington’s response and Ra
From Havana Read Spanish Version
By Manuel Alberto Ramy
HAVANA — During his speech on July 26, Cuba’s interim President Raúl Castro reiterated his offer to dialogue with whatever U.S. administration emerges from the 2008 elections.
On the same day, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack responded that "the only real dialogue [Havana] needs to hold is with the Cuban people" and repeated the well-known calls for "free" elections in a multiparty political system.
In connection with the topic, a report by the French news agency AFP says Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen declared that "the United States is not the problem. The problem is Fidel Castro and the communist system."
Are Vietnam and China not communist? What is the major difference between Cuba and those two countries? Do Vietnam and China have a multiparty system and do they hold elections acceptable to the United States?
Like previous U.S. governments, the Bush administration maintains very close relations with Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar, to give you just three examples. In those countries there is no political pluralism or elections such as Washington demands from Cuba before engaging in a constructive dialogue, never mind relations.
I could add to that list the close relationships of different U.S. administrations with countries whose governments never maintained (or currently maintain) a transparent and fluid dialogue with their people. In Mexico, during the almost seven decades of PRI rule [Institutional Revolutionary Party], there was never a dialogue. A multiparty political system was only an acceptable fiction.
Pre-Chávez Venezuela, which was characterized by the alternation in power of two parties (Democratic Action and COPEI) and was touted as an example of representative democracy and political stability, maintained so much communication and dialogue with its people that it socialized poverty to the tune of 70-80 percent of the population. Is that the invitation being extended to the Cubans by Mr. McCormack?
The problem with Cuba is complicated, but there is a difference between Cuba and the communist governments in China and Vietnam. The latter don’t weigh sufficiently in the electoral dynamics of "representative democracy," because the U.S. does not have Chinese and Vietnamese minorities with sufficient power to promote policies contrary to the majority opinion of the American people with respect to U.S. relations with China and Vietnam. However, the pressure of the Cuban minority in South Florida does dictate rules to Washington when it comes to U.S. policy toward Cuba.
The above shows the quality of dialogue between the people and the political leaders in Washington, where electoral machineries replace dialogue. No reform is needed in D.C.; here, it is — yes.
No one questions the fact that Cuba needs reforms, not even the top leaders, who are echoing the opinions and malaise of the population. The reality of life does not allow for ear plugs. And I do not doubt that reforms will be the result of the normal tensions between the citizens and the established institutions.
In his speech during the 54th anniversary of the rebel raid on the Moncada army barracks, Raúl Castro announced that "structural changes" would be needed, and that "concepts and methods" of work that "have been superseded by life" would be abandoned. He also said that the changes would not be spectacular.
The changes cannot go beyond the country’s real capabilities — especially the economic capabilities. This is a major limitation, and very objective, too, if we realize that (according to the National Bureau of Statistics) Cuba’s foreign debt is $15.38 billion. Short-term indebtedness leaped from 16 percent of that amount in 2005 to 36.2 percent last year.
The reader should remember that just as the ordinary Cuban has to invent ways to pay for his daily expenses because he doesn’t have enough money, the country also has to honor its debts. Yet, Cuba has few funds to assume a great many problems that often overwhelm the national budget. The Bush administration knows that perfectly well.
Another limitation, this time of a subjective nature, lies within the political-administrative machinery, which puts into effect whatever policies are determined. As in any machine of this type, habit and routine are part of the qualities and the mentality that need to be changed.
If to this we add the fact that the top leadership is undergoing a process of generational change and creating a new style of work to which the machine has not been accustomed, we can see another factor that hampers the speed of the responses.
I think the example given by Raúl Castro in his speech — where he described organizational problems affecting the milk-production chain and the industrial processing and distribution of milk to consumers — opened the doors to the decentralization of solutions. Raúl clearly favors an increased participation of the community in this and other topics affecting Cubans.
Raúl fired a two-barreled shotgun: the mobilization of the communities and pressure on the bureaucracy, both of which will facilitate change. This tension is an important part of the new dynamics, which appear to fit in with the process of change.
This is a slow process, but one that cannot be put off. It won’t be lineal, either. There will be zig-zags, steps forward and backward, maybe even sideways. It will be a careful process, because the objective is not to revert socialism but to re-create it. From this standpoint, I think it will be easier to understand not only the caution but also the delicacy with which the process will have to be conducted.
What the people behind Mr. McCormack are counting on is that all the doors will be opened at one time, the way it happened in the former Soviet Union. Conditioned by its supporters, the Bush administration attempts to determine the direction and depth of the changes that Cubans should make, a bit at a time.
The population wants solutions — I wrote that earlier — but multiparty politics is not among the priorities of the huge majority of Cubans. Not yet, anyway.
Manuel Alberto Ramy is Havana bureau chief of Radio Progreso Alternativa and editor of Progreso Semanal, the Spanish-language version of Progreso Weekly.
