Anthony Atchison

Cuba has become more and more destitute since the revolution and has fallen on hard times since the collapse of the Soviet Union, a period also known as the “Special Period”. ( Efrén Córdova)

A recent Economist article entitled “Flickering lights” describes how the current economic slump has forced the Cuban government to ration electricity in a new austerity program for businesses. One cause of the Cuban budget deficit is falling price of nickel. The price of this important Cuban export has fallen from about US$23.00 in May 2007 to around US$7.15 in late June 2009 (Kitcometals.com), which in a state controlled economy means that Cuba is facing a budget shortfall. The brownouts occurring are caused directly by Cuba’s inability to pay for government programs enacted by President Raul Castro.

I had written earlier, in the blog post, ¿Can We Be Amigos?, that there will be no meaningful change in Cuba’s attitude towards the U.S. until real democratic progress is made in that country. President Obama extended the olive branch at the Summit of the Americas, and more recently the Organization of American States  voted to lift Cuba’s 47-year suspension from the regional bloc, with the U.S. requiring Democratic reform. The economist article stated that,

Fidel Castro, reiterated his country’s long-held line that it did not want to be in what it calls an imperialist grouping.

This confirms that the Castro brothers are not interested in promoting Cuba in the Latin American community, but instead their own ideology. I would like to think that the Cuban people would want to participate in the OAS meetings and discussing, making progress, and promoting causes for all of Latin America. Until the Cuban government allows its people’s voices to be heard each summer and each economic downturn they will unfortunately have these same shortages.

The Fifth Summit of the Americas held in Trinidad and Tobago on April 17th shed light on America’s new role in the Western Hemisphere. The most controversial issue was President Obama’s welcoming attitude towards the Republic of Cuba. According to CBSnews.com, at the summit President Obama made it the issue there by stating:

We all have a responsibility to see that the people of the Americas have the ability to pursue their own dreams in democratic society… I have already changed a Cuba policy that has failed to advance liberty or opportunity for the Cuban people.

President Obama lifted the travel ban but has yet to lift the trade embargo. He wants this act to signify the beginning of a new open relationship between the two nations. The U.S. could approach this openness in three different ways: lift the tourism and trade embargo, offer lenient trade terms, or provide civilian and military aid during national disasters or external threats.

All these points sound good and many are saying, “Caesar’s better parts
Shall be crown’d in Obama” (Act 3 Scene 2). But why should our attitude toward Cuba change? There are two reasons, one is that the U.S. is willing to open negotiations with some concessions; or the Cuban government admits the errors they have committed and wants to open up a dialogue with concessions. The second option is what the US has always wanted: for the country of Cuba to hold peaceful and democratic elections, provide liberty and security for its citizens, and have cordial relations with other American nations. Few realize that Cuba is the only country in the Western Hemisphere that does not hold public elections on any level. The first option is what Cuba has always wanted: for the US to realize that its ongoing approach failed, That the US was not the sole power in the Americas, that socialism in Cuba and other Latin American countries worked exceptionally well and should be emulated or praised, and for Cuba to rule itself as it has for the last 60 years.

Neither series has occurred nor should President Obama support either unless he and President Raúl Castro come to certain agreements. Cuba is still the same communist country that it has been since Fidel Castro took over. The storming of the Peruvian Embassy on April 6, 1980 by ten thousand impoverished citizens , the Mariel boatlift, and the imprisonment during “Black Spring” all point to strife and unrest in a citizen suppressed country. In April 20’s Wall Street Journal Laura Meckler wrote,

‘Once the U.S. and Cuba are seated across the table, the Americans will realize that the Cubans are willing to talk but not to give anything up,’ said Brian Latell, a former Central Intelligence Agency Cuba analyst who has written a biography of Raúl Castro. Mr. Castro has made similar assertions before without following through. After taking over from his ailing brother in 2006, he promised a host of changes, few of which materialized.

Before a dialogue is opened between the US and Cuba, Cuba must recognize the need for change. It could start with President Obama asking the Castro brothers to believe in change. A dissolution of the old ways, a renewed pledge of peace and prosperity, a restructuring of an old state which used oppression, intimidation, and injustice to control a nation. I think that a correct and well timed impersonation of a strong leader with a vision such as Theodore Roosevelt would be appropriate now and could be more effective than an uninhibited open door policy with which other foreign leaders, as Hugo Chavez has shown, would misuse.