|
CounterPunch
August
9, 2002
An Open Letter
to George W. Bush
on US Policy Toward Cuba
by Nelson P. Valdés
CYNIC,
n. A blackguard whose faulty vision sees things as they are,
not as they ought to be.
Ambrose Bierce
Dear President Bush,
A lot of people on the right have expressed
support for your tough policy on Cuba. Liberals and leftists,
on the other hand, have opposed it. This might lead you to think
that perhaps every person who sympathizes with the government
headed by Fidel Castro rejects your policy. Well, that is incorrect.
In fact, I think I speak for many in Cuba, the United States
and throughout Latin America. We support and like the policy
of having a Cuban embargo (as you call it, for us is called a
blockade).
Now, you might think that I am trying
to confuse you and that I am engaged in doubletalk. That's not
the case. However, I have decided to write this letter for the
historical record; so it would show that some of us know on what
side we are on while your side does not.
Let me reiterate:
The policy on Cuba of not having normal
relations should be kept. The archconservative exiles who have
advised you on Cuba have done the revolutionary cause a great
service.
We know that the objective of your policy,
and of every past US administration, is to overthrow the Cuban
government and to impose on the island what you think is best
for U.S. interests.
But after more than 41 years of blockade
the Cuban revolutionary regime is still there.
There might be all kinds of reasons for
that outcome, but since US policy is so overwhelmingly influential
on such little island--it must be contributing in some fashion
to keeping the system in place.
I am not sure whether you ever learned
about un-intended consequences; but let me tell you that US opposition
to the Cuban revolution is a wonderful political capital that
radical revolutionaries can constantly exploit and do so. In
fact such political capital does not go away, moreover those
of you in Washington DC are always providing more of it; which
is great. You have given the Cuban revolution a political tool--that
is, the need to defend self-determination and anti-imperialism--allowing
the Cubans to do a lot of "consciousness raising."
Nationalism is a wonderful tool to unite
people against a foreign threat, and you continue to provide
the foreign threat. You should know that, you are experiencing
and benefiting from it. It will be naive of you to think that
such policy works only in the US and not in Cuba. The permanent
threat from your side, brings unity into the ranks of the revolutionaries
while convincing Cuban citizens not to be too critical of things
on the island. Well you and your Attorney General know THAT!
It is easy to shut people up on the grounds of battling imperialism
just 90 miles away. The short distance between our two countries
has worked for revolutionaries and not for you, and the Cubans
are really thankful--so I have decided to let you know.
Your own propagandists tell the U.S.
public that the Cuban government can get every item the island
needs from Mexico, Canada or any other country and that consequently
the embargo only denies Cubans American products. That is true.
The economic blockade does not stop Cuba from buying things anywhere.
And the Cuban government is certainly glad that although you
realize that you continue the policy of denying Cuba access to
your products. It is silly and every revolutionary loves it when
you persist.
Granted, goods and transportation increase
prices for Cuba, but it is a good trade off.
The Cuban government will stress to the
world that Cubans want to buy things from you (in that way Cubans
are the victims and also the "good guys.).
Moreover, it shows you as having a policy
that is totally inconsistent--you preach free trade and then
embargo Cuba. Inconsistency is a wonderful policy, keep it up.
Cubans certainly use such contradiction
in your policies all the time--at every international conference,
when people visit the islands, and they don't fail to tell our
own people about it. Your policy of denying Cuba economic access
and trade, wins the revolutionary regime a lot of friends. Also,
it permits the Cuban government to blame you for any economic
mishap there. You know that as well, and even say it to the world;
but you keep steadfast to the policy. That is very considerate
and it is appreciated, even if it is not stated openly.
Now your demands that Cuba should have
the kind of political system that you want, and that elections
be supervised, etc, is also something that you should continue
to repeat.
First, it allows Cubans to stress that
you want to boss the people there, as it was done before 1959.
In fact every time anyone in DC makes such a statement, the media
in Cuba broadcast it over all radio and television stations.
Radio Marti also helps spread the word that you, an outsider,
wants to control the Cubans. You think you are fostering your
political interests when in fact you prove and ratify the arguments
used by the revolutionaries there.
It is rather moving when you declare
to the world, and openly, that you will finance an opposition
within Cuba. Not even those in Cuba who identify with the US
want you to do that.
When in the past you sent money to the
opposition and did so covertly it was a bit more difficult for
the Cuban government to point a finger at you; now, you do it
overtly. Please continue that policy. It makes it easier to undermine
Cuba's adversaries; besides, indirectly, the Cuban government
ends up with the money too.
I certainly like the restrictions you
have imposed on travel to Cuba. You cannot help it, you continue
thinking like a capitalist and believe that the Cubans are only
driven by the desire to have profits; so you conclude that Fidel
et al want zillions of Americans landing on the island. No way!
That would be a terrible headache, too difficult to manage. It
is better if thousands rather than millions went to Cuba, that
way they do not have to deal with so many unruly Americans who
would create havoc in that society. Besides the Cuban government
does not want to be accused of curtailing the number of people
who could enter Cuba; it is better if you do that for them. Thus,
the Cubans can be portrayed as defenders of the freedom to travel.
Heck, they have become defenders of the U.S. Constitution!.
Finally, it is certainly a wonderful
idea the open arms policy--giving any Cuban the opportunity to
leave the island and stay in the US. Providing preferential treatment
and entry to the Cubans upsets everyone else in the world, in
Cuba they like that. Moreover, it gets rid of potential domestic
opponents.
Think of it, you try to provide economic
and political pressure and then you also proffer a escape valve.
At times all over the island people wonder
if you are really trying to help Fidel. It looks that way.
Again, let me remind you. Your policy
has not achieved your objectives, but it has been rather helpful
in keeping the Cuban revolutionary government in power. Thus,
if it does not work, do not fix it!
And thank you for assisting the revolutionary
cause.
Nelson Valdés is a professor of sociology specializing in
Latin America at the University of New Mexico. He can be reached
at: nvaldes@unm.edu
Today's Features
Mokhiber / Weissman
Corporate
Crime:
More Shareholder Power
Not the Solution
Ansar Ahmed
The Waning
of the
Pax Americana
Alexander Cockburn
War,
the Military and the Hunt for the "Violence Gene"
home / subscribe
/ about us
/ books
/ archives
/ search
/ links
/
|
August 9,
2002
Mokhiber
/ Weissman
Corporate
Crime:
More Shareholder Power
Not the Solution
Ansar Ahmed
The Waning
of the
Pax Americana
Alexander
Cockburn
War,
the Military and the Hunt for the "Violence Gene"
August 8,
2002
Ron Jacobs
Iraq:
The Final Storm?
Dave Marsh
Now Ain't
the Time
for Your Tears
Mark Weisbrot
Bush
Administration Tries to Hide Role in Venezuela Coup
Anthony Gancarski
AIPAC,
Congress and Iraq
Robert Fisk
Families
of the
Disappeared Demand Answers
Gary Leupp
Karzai's
Bodyguard
August 7,
2002
Anis Shivani
The First
21st Century
Police State
Jeffrey St.
Clair
Fallon's
Fallen
Is the US Navy Killing
Children in Nevada?
Robert Fisk
For the
Forgotten Afghans,
the UN Offers a Fresh Hell
Dr. Susan
Block
Rigas in
Cuffs
Bill Christison
Disastrous
Foreign Policies of the US Part 5: the Call of Democracy?
August 6,
2002
Philip Farruggio
Signs
of the Elites
Bruce Gagnon
We Must
Come Alive
David Krieger
From
Hiroshima to Hope
Jerre Skog
Global
Reach of Corporate Crime or What the Hell are
They Teaching at Harvard?
Robert Fisk
Return to
Afghanistan:
Collateral Damage
Alexander
Cockburn
The
Fox in the Pension Fund
August 5, 2002
Rahul Mahajan
Iraq
and the New Great Game
Jordy Cummings
The
Last Frontier of
Israel and Palestine
Bernard Weiner
Inside
Saddam's Diary
Mike Leon
US Mute
to Israeli Brutality
Norman Madarasz
Brazil:
the Most Important Election of 2002?
August 4, 2002
Susan Davis
Fat Americans
August 3, 2002
David Krieger
Nuclear
Apartheid
Gilad Atzmon
The End
of Innocence
Gavin Keeney
Everybody's
a Critic
Alexander Cockburn
Can the Times' Jeff Gerth
Save Dick Cheney?
Resources:
100s of Links
About 9/11
CounterPunch:
Complete
Coverage of 9/11 and Its Aftermath
Five
Days That
Shook The World:
Seattle and Beyond
By
Alexander Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
Photos by Allan Sekula
(Click Here to Order from CounterPunch
Online at 20% Off Amazon.com's price!)
Read
Whiteout and Find Out
How the CIA's Backing of the Mujahideen Created the World's Most
Robust Heroin Market and Helped to Finance the Rise of the Taliban
and Osama bin Laden
Whiteout:
CIA, Drugs & the
Press
by Alexander
Cockburn
and Jeffrey St. Clair
|