Without One Vote Against

When Castro says that Cuba is the most democratic country in the world, I am uncertain if he is being serious or it is black humor. I can understand that a lifelong guerrilla, fiercely opposed to the capitalist model, does not appreciate at all the system of representative democracy in the Western world.

But from there to setting up a series of institutions, silent and obedient to the government, where the three branches of State are controlled by one person and to tell us that this is the only true democracy, confirms to me that all autocrats have that pathological mania to appear as democrats.

A dictator should state clearly that he is going to rule until his death, because he considers himself a superior being. Or because he does what the hell he wants.

Any resemblance is not purely coincidental

I’m sick of the lies. Perhaps true democracy does not exist. In countries where universally accepted laws operate and human rights are respected, failures occur in bulk, but people shout what they want against their government and no one will look at you with a mean face.

Also, there are independent courts and parliament is like a madhouse, where everyone disagrees with the package of measures released by the president. That’s what I mean by a democracy.

In Cuba, when the Castros talk nobody can go against them. Publicly, no one has ever been seen raising their hand to tell the comandante that he is pondering a load of nonsense.

On the island, everyone is wrong. The infallible are the Castros. If things in Cuba are crooked it’s not by their misrule. No, the ‘guilty’ are the negligent workers and certain talentless ministers.

General Raul Castro wants there to be disagreement. But when they end their speeches and the president of the dull and monotonous Cuban parliament asks the members whether they agree with the words of the leader, everyone, absolutely everyone, raises their hand.

I will believe in the Socialist democracy, as advocated by the regime in Havana, when you see a negative vote.

By Iván García

From: Translating Cuba

Go to Home Page

Communism 3.0

Would also Castro put these "tours" on sale?

Cuban officials 'studying' how not to act like communists. Oh well, it's progress

Cuba has announced it is "studying" ways that Cuban residents can be allowed to travel outside the country as tourists.

Wow. That's a tall order. Let's hope they put the best minds in the Cuban government on this one.
We can imagine what that study committee's discussions might be like.

Chairman: "OK, folks, we've got to figure out ways Cubans can be allowed to travel outside the country for tourism and actually have them come back. And we don't have a lot of time to come up with an answer -- maybe only years, knowing the majestic efficiency of our great revolutionary government comrades!" 

Member: "Well, rather than reinvent the wheel, maybe we should look at other countries. Is there any other country that actually allows its people to leave whenever they want, for any reason?" 

Silent pause. 

"Nahhhhh," the group says in unison. 

Don't get us wrong. We appreciate that Raul Castro, Fidel's brother and now president, is loosening things up in Cuba. But the thing that best shines a light on how insane communism is, and how stupid communists are, is how they look when they start trying to weasel their way out of the disaster they, themselves, have created.

So, how do you let Cubans go abroad as tourists?

Well, if you're not worried about whether they return -- and you shouldn't be worried about it, unless you're running a prison rather than a country -- then you just do it !

Source: Augusta Chronicle

Go to Home Page

Has Cuba Lost its Last Chance?

Raúl Castro’s consolidation of his position as successor to his brother Fidel confirms that his Cuba will give the military domestic hegemony, which makes any serious political or economic opening in the near future seemingly impossible. The Cuban Communist Party’s recent Sixth Congress reflected this, offering little new and rehashing a lot of the old.

Since ill health forced Fidel Castro to retire from Cuba’s leadership, Raúl has opened the doors to the military and pushed out even those civilians who had been his brother’s trusted associates. While Fidel wrote doctrinaire articles in the official press, the armed forces took over politics and production. Fidel’s appearance at the Party’s congress – an event full of political significance, because he has only rarely participated in public events since becoming sick in 2006 – seemed to confirm his support for this outcome.

We now know that the congress had been put off for 14 years, owing to deep divisions among Cuban leaders. The civilian group that was ousted wanted to adapt the “Chinese model” of gradual economic reforms initiated by the Party. Raúl and his military cronies, however, cornered Fidel and imposed their group’s criteria.

In Asian communism – as practiced in China and Vietnam, in particular – the Party leadership rotates periodically, and a civilian leadership controls the military. Systemic nepotism in the top political and military leadership exists only in North Korea.

By contrast, Cuba’s new Raúlist political structure takes its inspiration from the purest tradition of Latin American military caudillismo, using communist ideology pragmatically. The model is clearly revealed in the nature of Raúl’s proposed reforms. The economy’s most dynamic industries – namely, mining and tourism – are reserved for the military, which manages them in a business-like, profit-seeking way.

Only in these privileged sectors can some reforms be seen. The “new class” that populates them does not demonize foreign capital. Indeed, there are talks centered on debt, with some creditors interested in the mechanics of capitalization.

For the rest of the economy, the Party’s position recalls the famous line from Lampedusa’s Il Gattopardo (The Leopard): something must change so that everything else can remain the same. The sale of buildings and vehicles will be legalized and self-employment authorized, mainly in the service sector. But, lacking capital and forced to pay taxes, what fate awaits industries driven by the state into the market?

Nearly 1.5 million Cubans will never have a stake in the industries controlled by the military bourgeoisie. Nor was the issue of land ownership resolved: only a few plots will be leased in some form.

As a result, Cuba will continue to import a lot of food, most of it at a price that the population cannot afford. Moreover, ordinary Cubans fear that their ration cards – their only means of getting food – will be canceled. Indeed, according to Raúl, the state-controlled food-rationing system is a “factor of immobility,” but no one knows what might replace it.

The Sixth Congress ignored questions of human rights. Neither freedom of the press nor access to information was on the agenda, and the opposition will continue to be ignored, its only options being conditional freedom or exile. Migration, an option financed by remittances from relatives in the United States, was not made any more flexible, either.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, many believed that the Cuban regime would take the road to reform, however grudgingly. But the democratic transitions in Eastern Europe made Fidel Castro wary, so the first opportunity for a similar transition in Cuba was lost. Now an opportunity to introduce young blood and new ideas has similarly been missed: although the Sixth Congress adopted a ten-year limit for holding office, the two people designated to succeed Raúl Castro are both octogenarians.

In the 1980’s, Deng Xiaoping warned that China would collapse if it didn’t change; Raúl has said the same thing. But Deng chose real reform and real change, appealing to overseas Chinese, whom the Party had demonized for many years, to bet on the country’s future and invest. The diaspora listened – the beginning and the secret of the reforms that put China on the path to its current economic success.

Cuba cannot remain isolated, dependent on Venezuelan petrodollars and penalized by America’s ill-conceived trade embargo. Any realistic agenda for change in Cuba inexorably requires opening up to the world, along with ensuring full freedom within the country. Unfortunately, the Sixth Congress demonstrated that the Cuban Communist Party remains in denial about the country’s prospects and options.

Carlos Perez Llana

Source: The Guatemala Times

Go to Home Page

Communist jalopy creeps to capitalism

The "good" old times are over long time ago.

The communist utopia that Fidel Castro hoped to bring to Cuba with the revolution he led more than 50 years ago has, from all indications, collapsed into a stifling stasis for everyday Cubans.

Most live in the same abode from birth to death, and struggle to maintain either rickety cars imported from the Soviet Union more than two decades ago, or 1950s-era jalopies that, on these shores, would be wheeled out at classic car shows. Few new products or ideas enter Cuba, thanks in part to America's long-running economic embargo, and few Cubans ever see the world beyond their island thanks to Byzantine travel restrictions.

Anyone who is waiting on the edge of their seat for the regime to fall should probably lean back and get comfortable - a popular uprising like those that brought down totalitarian governments from East Germany to Egypt doesn't appear to be in the offing. But there are some indications that Cuba's rulers are opening the door, a tiny bit, to some economic reforms.

A Communist Party gathering in April approved new guidelines that would allow Cubans to buy and sell houses and cars on a limited basis, let private farmers use state land and, possibly, let cooperatives bypass the maze of state bureaucracy and send their products straight to consumers.

While it's barely American-style, go-go capitalism, it's at least a start. Like a stubborn music buff who refuses to part with his eight-track tapes, Cuba is one of the few remaining communist regimes in the world, and the day when it also crumbles seems an inevitability. One can't help believing that we could help hasten its demise by lifting the economic embargo that has been in effect since the Kennedy administration.

Exposure to other cultures and ways of life has proven to be the undoing of other iron-fisted regimes before, and that's why your garden-variety dictator is reluctant to see satellite dishes sprout up on the sides of those drab apartment buildings that seem to be the hallmark of totalitarian societies. As the late Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis once pointed out, "Sunlight is the best disinfectant."

Source: Observer Reporter

Go to Home Page

AP Report on Cuba's May Day Reads Mostly Like Castro Propaganda Piece

Where are the changes? Photo Courtesy of Gonzalo Obes.

The guess here is Associated Press writers Peter Orsi and Andrea Rodriguez believe their May Day dispatch from Cuba represents an example of objectivity and insightful analysis. Anyone with knowledge of how a country under the iron grip of a five-decade Communist dictatorship really operates would beg to differ.

The AP pair leaves readers with the impression that although Cubans are impatient to learn the details of the economic changes the government has passed but not revealed, they are generally supportive of whatever improvements might occur -- as if anyone in the island nation is really free to speak their mind.

Readers might be able to determine for themselves that a decidedly unfree situation exists, but Orsi and Rodriguez ignored a Radio Marti report (translated here by Google's translator, and probably more accurately here by Babalu Blog) that the government launched a wave of repression in advance of May Day to ensure that there would be no disruption of its planned events. The AP pair only needed to cite the report without endorsing it; that they wouldn't even do this betrays either ignorance or a willingness to let readers believe completely unsupported assertions about potential improvement in a country that is the third most economically repressive regime on earth according to the Heritage Foundation's 2011 Index of Economic Freedom. Of the countries evaluated, only Zimbabwe and North Korea were worse.

Here are selected paragraphs from Orsi's and Rodriguez's report (numbered tags are mine):

Cubans mark May Day, await details of change

Hundreds of thousands of Cubans marched through Havana and other cities on Sunday to mark May Day in a demonstration touted as a vast show of support for economic changes recently approved by the Communist Party - even though the people holding placards and shouting slogans haven't seen the details yet. [1]

Nearly two weeks after the party endorsed President Raul Castro's bet to fix the island's broken economy through limited free-market reforms, the government has not released specifics of the 311-point guidelines, or said when it will do so.

The parade, always a big event on the communist-run island, has nevertheless been touted by the official party newspaper, Granma, as "the best chance for Cuban workers to ratify ... their backing for the accords." [2]

... Still, many in Havana said they were impatient to see the actual details of the changes.

"I would like to know what the guidelines have that's new, because so far it seems to be a lot of noise and nothing concrete," said Manuel Pedrosi, 56, who was just a small boy when Fidel and Raul Castro's revolution succeeded in 1959. "But if we've waited 50 years, we can wait a little longer."

The economic measures approved unanimously and en bloc at a party summit April 19 include potential blockbusters that would open a door in the island's tightly controlled economic system, such as legalizing the buying and selling of private property and providing bank credit to finance small businesses. [3]

... While Cubans have generally welcomed the economic overhaul, some expressed impatience with the lack of clarity. Some say they are anxious to go into business for themselves or buy a home big enough to accommodate their family, but are waiting to see the ground rules.

Others are nervous about plans - shelved for the time being - to lay off hundreds of thousands of state workers, and to gradually phase out the ration book, which provides Cubans with a basic basket of food at greatly subsidized prices. [4]

"This can't wait. Everyone is going to benefit in one way or another because there will be a little more freedom to do as you like with what's yours," said Yordanka Rodriguez, a 45-year-old Havana resident. "We just have to see what the terms are like. Until that happens, it's hard to judge accurately." [5]

Notes:

• [1] -- Omitted, as reported by Radio Marti: The government planned to "transport thousands of Cubans to the "Plaza of the Revoution" to celebrate the International Day of Workers." It would appear that the people aren't sufficiently fired up about the situation to come out and "celebrate" without "encouragement."
• [2] -- So that's how it works. The government buses in "celebrants," and, voila (or, in Spanish, "como si por magia, or "as if by magic), their presence represents endorsement of laws they know nothing about.
• [3] -- Given that they haven't seen it, it's interesting that the AP reporters seem to be able to describe what's in it. If they can't, they should have written that "the economic measures ... potentially include blockbusters" instead of claiming that they "include potential blockbusters." As to private property, Orsi himself reported on April 27 that "(Raul Castro) drew a line in the Caribbean sand as to which reforms should remain, telling party luminaries that he had rejected dozens of suggested reforms that would have allowed the concentration of property in private hands." I would welcome an explanation from Mr. Orsi as to how one can "buy and sell" private property without "accumulating" it.
• [4] -- Context, guys. An item posted by Bush administration Commerce Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez notes that, "Today, the average Cuban lives on $20 a month and relies on government ration cards" (calling this "living" is a stretch).
• [5] -- This strained quote is the final paragraph of the report. Unless he is a party insider, Mr. Yordanko Rodriguez can't possibly know that "everyone is going to benefit" or "that there will be a little more freedom." But despite the lack of any evidence, less experienced readers will come away from the AP report believing that this is the case.

Interesting. That last point echoes the reporting about Obamacare just over a year ago.

By Tom Blumer

Source: NewsBusters

Go to Home Page

Cuba: Bloggers Reflect on Reforms at Communist Party Congress

The sixth congress of the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC), which was held in Havana from April 16 - 19, may have marked a major turning point for the Cuban economic system, and for Cuban society at large.

As detailed by the BBC, party members approved measures to institute term limits for top party and government leaders, legalize home ownership and sales, and restructure state salaries so that they will be determined in part by the amount and quality of labor performed by workers.

While many US and European news organizations viewed the changes as a great stride towards a market economy, with headlines like “Havana frees up markets—with a caveat” (The Miami Herald) and “Raúl Castro apuesta por reformar la economía y el Partido Comunista en el VI Congreso” [es] [“Raúl Castro is committed to reforming the economy and the Communist Party at the VI Congress”] (El Pais), the rhetoric of the congress itself demonstrated a commitment to strengthening and modernizing, but not marketizing, Cuban socialism.

Bloggers in Cuba, and those who follow Cuba from other parts of the world, offered a diverse range of reactions.

Deisy Francis Mexidor, author of Kimbombo que resbala [es], asked various Cubans for their opinions on the proposed changes. Many were enthusiastic about the ideas proposed, but concerned about how they would be implemented. A journalism student interviewed by Mexidor commented that,

"[La] cuestión es cómo se logrará mantener el socialismo como proyecto sin caer en la economía de mercado.

The question is how we’ll be able to maintain the socialist project without becoming a market economy.

Another interviewee, the manager of a state-owned business, remarked,

"[D]ebemos ser capaces de lograr una mayor productividad, de bajar los gastos y hacer las cosas con mayor eficiencia, de lo contrario no se puede hablar de elevar salarios.

We should be able to achieve greater productivity, to lower production costs, and to do things with greater efficiency—if we can’t do this, we cannot talk about raising salaries."

Pedazos de la isla [es] interviewed various bloggers and journalists who are known for their criticism of the government, including Laritza Diversent, of Las leyes de Laritza [es]. Diversent noted that while some Cubans closely followed and opined on the Congress, many were ambivalent about the outcome because of the lack of progress in years past.

"Desde mi punto de vista el Congreso fue totalmente intranscendente, porque una cosa es lo que hablen ahí, y otra cosa es la que se haga. […] No hay una restructuración del partido o una restructuración democrática.

Pero nada de esto tiene ningún tipo de importancia entre los ciudadanos dentro de Cuba. No tiene ninguna importancia como yo creo que tiene afuera de Cuba. Por supuesto, es porque muy pocos cubanos le interesa la política, o no la entienden, precisamente por estos “va y bienes” de que hoy deciden algo, mañana deciden otra cosa, y entonces vuelven a cambiar. Por toda esta inseguridad nosotros no le hacemos ningún tipo de caso a ese Congreso.

From my point of view, the Congress was totally insignificant, because what they say is one thing, but what they do is another. There is no restructuring of the Party, nor is there democratic restructuring.

But none of this is important for the citizens of Cuba. It has no importance in comparison to the importance it has outside of Cuba. And this is precisely because very few Cubans are interested in politics, or they simply do not understand it. And they feel this way because of the “back and forth” of the government, while one day it says one thing, tomorrow it’ll say another, and so on. Because of this insecurity, we do not pay any attention to this Congress."

In the most radical change brought by the Congress, Raúl Castro himself proposed that top-level positions be limited to two, five-year terms. He emphasized the need for current leaders to encourage and educate younger politicians who would ultimately form the next generation of government on the island, and lamented the party’s inability to do this in the past. Contrary to this rhetoric, the party has elected the now 80 year-old Jose Machado Ventura, former party secretary and an original member of the July 26th Brigade, to the vice presidential seat that was left empty when Raúl took leadership of the country in 2008.

The irony of this choice has been criticized by Cubans on various sides of the political spectrum. Blogger Rogelio Díaz, author of Bubusopía [es] criticized the government’s inability to move forward, in spite of the consensus that this will be the only way for the original revolutionaries to build a sustainable legacy.

"[Lo] más preocupante es que [el liderazgo] todavia está en manos de los mismos sujetos estancadores de todo lo bueno y dinámico y prometedor y renovador y revolucionario de etapas anteriores.

The most worrisome part is that leadership is still in the hands of the same, now stagnating, originators of the great and dynamic and promising and innovative and revolutionary developments of past eras."

Octavo Cerco’s Claudia Cadelo [es] expressed a similar sentiment, writing that the implementation of the economic and political reforms agreed upon by the Congress could only move forward with new leadership in place.

"[Raúl] sabe, tiene que saberlo, que sus promesas sólo se cumplirán cuando él ya no esté en el Comité Central, cuando ya no sea el Primer Secretario de ningún partido, cuando verdaderamente una nueva ola de cargos públicos asuma los poderes.

[Raúl] knows, he has to know, that his promises will be fulfilled only when he is no longer on the Central Committee, when he is no longer First Secretary of any party, when a truly new wave of public officials assume power."

Ellery Roberts Biddle

Source: Global Voices

Go to Home Page

Acts of bravado hardly the panacea for failed states

Mugabe and Castro, two losers in power for decades.

Lots of my friends studied in Cuba. When they returned after four years on the Caribbean Island they waxed lyrical about the great revolutionary Fidel Castro. None of them had anything bad to say about him. One of my greatest wishes therefore was to meet this great icon before he or I died. Now because of his poor health this might not be possible or even necessary!

It has become clear in the past few months that my friends had been allowed to see, or had not been inquisitive enough to discover, what was really happening in Cuba. They were beneficiaries of Castro’s magnanimity and our own government encouraged a view of the island that was beyond reproach.

But I had my own fears. A few years ago the high-profile defection of two Cuban doctors working in Zimbabwe had awakened in the minds of even the least sceptical that “everything was but what it was not”.

Last September Castro confirmed in his own words that his economic model no longer worked even for Cuba.

He told Jeffrey Goldberg, a writer for the Atlantic Monthly magazine that “The Cuban model doesn’t even work for us anymore.”

Even in that statement Castro was being economic with the truth. Soviet-style socialism never worked for Cuba in the 50 years that he was forcing it upon his country.

A week ago Castro’s party, the Communist Party of Cuba, was meeting to discuss a raft of reforms that would, it was hoped, transform the country into a modern state and, more importantly, save the moribund party.

That meeting coincided with the 50th anniversary of the Bay of Pigs.

On April 17 1961 about 1 300 exiles, armed with US weapons, landed at the Bay of Pigs on the southern coast of Cuba. Hoping to find support from the local population, they intended to cross the island to Havana.

It was evident from the first hours of fighting that the exiles were likely to lose.

President JF Kennedy had the option of using the US Air Force against the Cubans but decided against it. Consequently, the invasion was stopped by Castro’s army.

By the time the fighting ended on April 19, 90 exiles had been killed and the rest had been taken as prisoners. The invasion made Castro wary of the US. He was convinced that the Americans would try to take over the island again. From the Bay of Pigs on, Castro had an increased fear of a US incursion on Cuban soil.

This was a heroic moment for Cuba for successfully defending its sovereignty but it also defined how Cuba was to operate in the next half century.

Because of the paranoia that resulted from the Bay of Pigs episode Cuba has been defined by little acts of bravado that brought economic stasis.

In the interview with Goldberg Castro even criticised his own actions during another little act of bravado, the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, when he urged the Soviet Union to launch nuclear weapons against the United States, telling Goldberg “it wasn’t worth it at all”.

How many other acts of the Communist Party of Cuba were not worth it at all? Sports boycotts, for example, were they worth it? And these were many.

For political reasons, Cuba boycotted the 2002 Central American and Caribbean Games in San Salvador, El Salvador. In 1987, Cuba did not compete at the Women’s World Junior Volleyball Championships in Seoul (South Korea). The reason: there were no diplomatic relations between Cuba and South Korea.

For political reasons, Cuba did not send a baseball team to the 27th Baseball World Cup in South Korea in 1982. Cuba boycotted the 1988 Olympic Games in South Korea.

Cuba sent only seven athletes to the 2007 World University Games in Thailand, heeding Fidel Castro’s fears about future defections. But the 1991 Pan American Games were held in Havana in which 39 countries participated. It is reported the Games were a huge source of pride for Castro.

Castro has been replaced as the leader of the Communist Party by his younger brother Raul who is trying to lead reforms, the major hitch though is that Raul himself is 79 years old and his vice José Ramón Machado Ventura, is an 80-year-old veteran of the revolution.

What this means is that although Raul is urging both political and economic reform, Cuba will for a while longer remain in the clutches of the same leadership that has failed to move it forward in the past 50 years.

One factor that stands out is that among Raul’s proposed reforms is not the opening of political space to other political parties. His major reform is that presidential terms would be limited to two five-year terms. This will not personally affect him for it will allow him to remain at the helm until 2018 when he will be 86.

A Cuban independent economist is quoted saying that term limits won’t “resolve our essential problem, which is the monopoly on power by a group whose policies have failed for 50 years.”

But Raul does not see this; he wants to stick with the same geriatric leadership instead of inviting competing opinion:
“Today, we are faced with the consequences of not having a reserve of well-trained replacements with sufficient experience and maturity to undertake the new and complex leadership responsibilities in the Party, the State and the Government,” he said at his party congress.

What is clear from the Cuban fiasco is that eventually it is not the little acts of bravado that will stand a country in good stead on the world stage but its cultural software. By cultural software I refer to a country’s exploits in the arts, in sport and in initiatives that encourage national and world peace.

South Africa, for example, has taken its place on the world stage because of the efforts of liberation icon Nelson Mandela, when he was still able to bring peace to the world after he reunited his own people who had just emerged from apartheid. The leaders that followed him are also engaged in peace-building initiatives on the African continent. But also importantly, its hosting of the Rugby World Cup and the Fifa World Cup have made it a giant on the world stage.

In Zimbabwe Zanu PF’s little acts of bravado have not moved the country forward. Gukurahundi, Murambatsvina, chaotic land reform, pulling out of the Commonwealth and alienating the country from the West have already brought untold suffering on the common people.

When will President Mugabe meet his Damascus moment and ask himself: “Is his model working for us anymore?”

By Nevanji Madanhire

Source: The Standard

Go to Home Page

In a nutshell / Cuba's revolution hasn't found its fountain of youth

CUBA'S Communist party held its convention this week. There were no surprises, but then there hardly ever are at Communist conventions unless the secret police show up.

This year, the big surprise involved former leader Fidel Castro, who ruled the Caribbean country with an iron fist -- Mr. Castro never bothered with niceties such as a velvet glove -- for 46 years until stepping down due to illness in 2006 and passing the crown on to his brother Raul.

Fidel had not been expected to make an appearance, but the 1,000 party faithful who showed up in Havana to nod their heads at all of Raul's proposals gave the old dictator a huge ovation anyway. And so they should have, since they all owe their sinecures to him. At the opening of the convention, Raul Castro had suggested that perhaps it was time for term limits in Cuba, that maybe his brother's 46 years in power was a little bit longer than is seemly in a government that claims to actually represent the people.

He suggested that maybe two five-year terms were as long as anybody really needed to be in power or as long as it was good for anybody to be in power. For a moment, he almost seemed as genuine a democrat as the Americans he regards with such loathing and who only allow their presidents to serve two four-year terms. (Canadian prime ministers, in contrast, can serve for as long as they can keep getting elected, which is perhaps one reason why our governments so often seem more sympathetic to their colleagues in Cuba than their fellow democrats in Washington.)

Even Raul's brother, Fidel, seemed to be in sync, suggesting that term limits were "a subject on which I have long meditated." Now that he is no longer in power -- for the first time since the revolution he no longer holds an office -- it appears that 46 years of meditation is time enough.

Unfortunately, when the leadership of the Communist party was announced at the close of the conference, nothing much had changed. A few younger people got promoted -- Communists in their 50s and 60s -- but when election fever had abated, President Raul Castro, who is 80 years old, was elected first secretary of the party and the No. 2 and 3 spots in the hierarchy went to men who are, respectively, 80 and relatively spring-like 78. Cuba, it seems, still needs another revolution.

by Tom Oleson

Source: Winnipeg Free Press

Go to Home Page

Death Penalty for Internet in Cuba?

A ghost runs around Cuba: the Internet ghost. A month after the arrival of fiber optics from Venezuela to create a much faster information and telecommunications highway — some media outlets are predicting speeds three thousand percent faster — the government seems to be looking for excuses to justify why, once again, it will continue violating our most basic rights, preventing us from freely accessing information from our homes through Internet.



Until recently the government alleged it couldn’t open up Internet to the “entire population” because, as a result of the US Embargo, Cuba was accessing Internet via satellite (Wi-Fi), slowing down connection speeds. This argument has been heavily debated in diverse sectors who, in spite of not being experts, question why the country didn’t expand its contract with satellite providers and installed additional servers to diversify the possibilities and provide and widen the service offering to a larger number of users. Also, if connections are truly that slow, why not give us the possibility, just like foreigners living in the country, to pay for access in spite of its slowness? Why marginalize fellow compatriots?

It seems that the rationale of this elite — mostly “angry” (irritated and tense) — which prevents us from browsing the Web is to continue discriminating and dividing our society with its repeated practice of extortion and influence; and they use the access to the net as one of the perks they usually give grant to their hardcore followers who are employed in key positions or positions of interest for the power elite.

I share the idea of ending the U.S. “blockade” or embargo against Cuba, but I also want to end the mental blockade of those in power, who pretend to be more interested in “breaking the blockade” of independents — who dare to use our freedom of expression with “fists and pens” — and in violating the right to information of the Cuban people. Working so everyone enjoy the technological advances they enjoy and defending the access to these sources of information that is also part of our rights, as it is part of our culture and general knowledge, and enriches, complements, and consolidates the cognitive universe.

Since the announcement that we would be able to access broadband Internet, people on different television shows were optimistic about the possibility of providing the masses with that tool that frees them. They begun to expound on the importance of Internet in culture, as a research tool to find all sorts of information, as a tool for the development and diversification of economic projects, etc.

At the XIV Convention and International Fair of Informatics 2011 hosted this past February in Havana there was evidence of the natural social appetite, but apparently protests in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries have sparked fear in the authoritarian Cuban oligarchy, and again, freedom was sentenced to death by shooting.

This is why it is becoming harder for them to support the argument of the benefits and justice of the Cuban political model, the respect of Cubans’ rights, and find themselves forced to put together television programs with the same old and abused arguments.

If the Internet is a poison, the best antidote against it is democracy, and the best antivirus to detect and discern any malicious code is culture, education, and freedom. Hence, the reiterated public assertion of government leaders stating that Cuba is the most educated and cultivated country in the world is a clear contradiction that no one understands.

If we are so smart, why can’t we access alternative information sources separate from the central state? Education and culture, to be true and not just propaganda, must be divorced from censure. Many of us wonder how can some have so much power and so much fear at the same time.

We know the government erected its flags over the pillars of health and education — both things currently in crisis — in the militarization of society and excessive and efficient (for them) control. It has been an easy feat without political parties, real unions — ones that answer to the needs of workers rather than administrators or the only political party — or an organized civil society looking for real solutions to their problems and capable of organizing and facing its challenges.

It has been a model disloyal to all ethical standards of governability. How easy it was ruling without alternatives to elect, more attractive political agendas to support, or even other points of view to listen to! How angry they must be for not being able to control the Internet they way they controlled the printed press, the radio, and the TV in the 60s! But modernity and technological advances are winning the battle, and every time they repeal any of the civil rights they, they become violators in the eyes of their own fellow countrymen.

There is no need for anyone to point at the facts: they are their own defense lawyers, but also their own prosecutors. The fact of the matter is that, as usual, they need to create the illusion of a plaza under siege to justify to their followers the reasons behind a new act of injustice. It is likely that the purpose is to condemn the Internet to life in prison without right to appeal. I hope I am wrong! but if the Cuban government is attempting to switch that light off, they might get away with it for some time, but I doubt they will be able to keep censorship forever.

Rosa María Rodríguez Torrado - Translating Cuba

Go to Home Page

A Transformational Year For Cuba Policy

Néstor Rodríguez Lobaina, currently in prison, is one of the faces of the pro-democracy movement in Cuba.

Since Fidel Castro fell ill in 2006 and transferred power to his brother Raul, members of Congress have been weighing possible options in U.S. policy toward Cuba, partially by raising the fundamental question: “is there a viable pro-democracy movement in Cuba?”

The uncertainty is not surprising. For years much of the foreign policy establishment in New York and Washington, and advocates of “normalizing” relations with Cuba, have argued there are no viable alternatives to Cuba’s totalitarian dictatorship. The only answer is to “throw in the towel,” unilaterally lift U.S. sanctions and engage the Castros. Somehow this engagement is supposed to alter their ruthless behavior.

That position had been music to the Castros’ ears. But on February 23, 2010, it was permanently debunked. That tragic morning, Orlando Zapata Tamayo, a forty-two year old afro-Cuban plumber and pro-democracy activist, died after an eighty-five day hunger strike. He was protesting the abuses of the Castro regime, his unjust imprisonment and denial of medical care.

Literally overnight, the international community's focus dramatically shifted. All of a sudden, there was undoubtedly a concrete pro-democracy movement in Cuba, noted for its courage and resilience. Since then, there is hardly a news story about Cuba that does not mention the opposition movement. While qualifiers such as “small,” “fractional,” and “divided” are frequently used by foreign news bureaus in Havana as they describe the pro-democracy movement—likely to avoid being booted from the island by the Castro regime—foreign reports no longer ignore the fact that a movement exists.

These accounts highlight a highly diverse group, challenging the Cuban state in a multitude of ways. There are the quixotic efforts of the wives, sisters, and daughters of Cuba's political prisoners, known as the Ladies in White, who dress in white and parade through public plazas. New regional bases of popular support are being carved out by leaders such as Jorge Luis Perez Garcia “Antunez” in the central province of Matanzas, by Orlando Zapata Tamayo's mother and siblings in the eastern province of Holguin, and by the Rodriguez Lobaina brothers in the Castros’ home province of Santiago de Cuba. These follow the historic trend of Cuba’s most prevalent revolutionary movements—against Spanish colonialism in the nineteenth century and against the Batista dictatorship in the 1950s—both of which originated in the eastern provinces and expanded westward to Havana. And then there is the stinging critique of the island's ever-growing blogger movement, led by Generation Y's Yoani Sanchez.

Cuba’s pro-democracy movement is becoming an increasingly difficult force to ignore. And for better or worse, everyone knows it.

The Castro regime knows it.

It is no coincidence that Fidel and Raul have spent the better part of 2010 doing back-flips to divert attention from the opposition. They have brought Fidel "back from the dead"—as he himself now boasts—for an ongoing series of speeches and interviews in which he has neurotically predicted nuclear holocaust and admitted the failings of Cuba’s socialist model (though he later recanted). The Castros have extended land-leases for foreigners to build sailing marinas and golf courses—for the use of foreigners only, of course. And most importantly, they began a crisis management campaign to clean up their image by announcing the release of dozens of political prisoners to Spain, although they will never be allowed to return to Cuba. Throughout the world, the Castro regime is now seen as making concessions in order to draw attention away from the pro-democracy movement.

The Catholic Church knows it.

At the peak of a summer standoff led by the Ladies in White and a hunger strike by a former political prisoner, Guillermo Farinas, the Catholic Church quickly saw an opportunity to become relevant, after decades of religious oppression and institutional silence. Catholic leaders volunteered themselves to intercede with the Castro regime to negotiate the release of political prisoners. What remains to be seen is whether the Church's intervention strengthened or weakened the pro-democracy movement by downplaying their role in the negotiations. Regardless, it represented an acknowledgment of the movement’s existence—and the potential power to be derived from it—by the Church.

The Spanish government knows it.

Just as the Catholic Church moved to intercede, the Spanish government weighed in as well. But unlike the Church, it was not motivated by its waning influence. Instead, it intervened as part of its ongoing effort to protect billions in investments on the island. Nothing is worse for business than instability and unpredictability. Again, this is a nod to the power of the opposition to disrupt business as usual.

Now finally, the U.S. Congress also appears to recognize it.

Instead of asking: is there a viable pro-democracy movement, members of Congress are asking: how can the United States support it?

In a July 14 letter to the U.S. Congress, some 500 pro-democracy leaders in Cuba explained how the United States might help, or at least avoid setting the movement back:

“At a moment such as this, to be benevolent with the dictatorship would mean solidarity with the oppressors of the Cuban nation. [We] believe that the freedom of Cuba will not arrive by means of the pocket-book or the lips of libidinous tourists, who are aseptic to the pain of the Cuban family. Rather, it will come through the efforts of those who, from within and abroad, fight for democratic change in Cuba.”

Plainly stated, the message of these pro-democracy leaders is simple: we are here, we are strong, and there is no reason to bail out the Castro regime.

by: Mauricio Claver-Carone

From: Yale Journal of International Affairs

Go to Home Page

Obama eases Cuba visa, remittance and travel curbs

President Barack Obama on Friday eased restrictions on visas, remittances and travel under the US embargo on Cuba, seeking to weaken the long grip on power of the communist Havana government. The move will expand religious and educational travel between the United States and Cuba, allow any airport to offer charter flights to the country and restore cultural initiatives suspended by the previous Bush administration.

"These measures will increase people-to-people contact, support civil society in Cuba; enhance the free flow of information to, from, and among the Cuban people and help promote their independence from Cuban authorities," the White House said in a statement.

"The president believes these actions, combined with the continuation of the embargo, are important steps in reaching the widely shared goal of a Cuba that respects the basic rights of all its citizens.

"These steps build upon the president's April 2009 actions to help reunite divided Cuban families; to facilitate greater telecommunications with the Cuban people; and to increase humanitarian flows to Cuba."

Obama's move means that religious organizations will be able to sponsor travel to Cuba under license and will allow higher educational institutions to send students to Cuba and restore licenses of educational exchanges.

Staff and students will also be allowed to attend conferences, seminars and workshops in Cuba and there will be more scope for journalists to travel to Cuba, according to the White House.

In another move, Obama will restore a license allowing any American to send remittances of up to 500 dollars per quarter to people in Cuba are not part of their families, as long as they are not senior Cuban government or Communist Party officials.

Obama also ordered that all US international airports will be able to provide charters to and from Cuba.

Currently, only New York, Miami and Los Angeles airports have that privilege.

The US embargo on Cuba was partially imposed in 1960, just after Fidel Castro staged his revolution, became law in 1962 and is now the biggest remaining hangover from the Cold War. The United States bans trade with and most travel to Cuba.

But Obama has the power, under legislation passed in 2000, to regulate 12 categories of authorized travel to Cuba.

He used his presidential authority in 2009 to reverse the Bush administration's tightened restrictions on immediate family travel and allowed Cuban Americans to send remittances to relatives.

But he cannot lift the embargo on Cuba unless the move is authorized by Congress, an unlikely prospect.

In a first reaction, Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio, born in Miami to Cuba American parents who fled Castro's revolution, condemned the decision to ease restrictions.

"I strongly oppose any new changes that weaken US policy towards Cuba. I was opposed to the changes that have already been made by this administration and I oppose these new changes," Rubio said.

"I believe that what does need to change are the Cuban regime's repressive policies towards the independent press and labor unions, its imprisonment of political prisoners and constant harassment of citizens with dissenting views, and its refusal to allow free multi-party elections.

"It is unthinkable that the administration would enable the enrichment of a Cuban regime that routinely violates the basic human rights and dignity of its people."

Source: Hindustan Times

Reaction to easing travel to Cuba mixed

Go to Home Page

Fidel Castro hints he may resign as party chief

"My turn"

HAVANA - Cuban leader Fidel Castro has suggested he may resign as Communist Party chief, his last leadership post, as he praised his brother Raul's management of the country.

"I got sick and did what I had to do - delegate my powers. I cannot do something that I am not capable of dedicating full time to," Castro told a group of students on Wednesday, state-run press said Thursday.

Castro said he was not speaking to them as first secretary of the ruling communist party but rather as a "soldier of ideas."

"I did not hesitate even a second to put aside my responsibilities," said the 84-year-old, who has kept busy writing and participating in academic meetings in recent years.

After ruling Cuba for nearly half a century, Castro provisionally ceded power to his younger brother, Raul Castro, in July 2006 following intestinal surgery, and officially resigned the presidency in February 2008.

For now, Castro officially remains head of Cuba's only legal political party, which will meet in April to discuss future economic policies for the Caribbean nation. He has held the post since 1965 after seizing power during the 1959 communist revolution.

Castro also praised his 79-year-old brother and successor, saying he was "pleased, because the country is working, despite of all the challenges." He also pointed to communist China, which has steadily grown in recent years, as a model for development.

Raul Castro has said Cuba's economic model, which has survived two decades since the Soviet Union dissolved, must be "updated" without copying patterns from other countries.

His proposed raft of economic reforms is up for debate at the Cuban Communist Party Congress, the first since 1997.

The reforms, which including cutting more than a million government jobs, represent a major management shakeup for the communist island.

They provide for an influx of foreign capital, an opening for private enterprise and reduced government role in the market - all steps away from the Soviet-style communist system currently in force that gave an overarching role to the state.

The proposals make efficiency a vital part of economic management, aim to do away with state subsidies, including food rations, and foresee starting a tax system.

Following up on his pledge on subsidies, president Castro is eliminating subsidies on materials to build and repair homes, with all such products due to be sold at higher prices free of government intervention from January.

Since Februrary, a few materials have been sold free of subsidies in over 300 stores, but subsidized sale prices remained in effect for most building products, trade ministry official Pilar Fernandez told Juventud Rebelde newspaper.

From: AsiaOne

Go to Home Page