Democracy for Cuba
While it's no secret to those who've been following the issue that the Bush administration's actual commitment to democracy-promotion leaves something to be desired, Slate's Jacob Weisberg rightly draws attention to the neglected case of Cuba. What you have here, in essence, is a dispute between dissidents living in Cuba, and the rightwing exile community based in Miami. The latter group has never been very popular in Cuba, descended as it is from the Battista dictatorship whose friendliness to American businesses and organized crime figures made it considerably better loved in Washington than in Havana.
But it's also a politically powerful group in the United States and a major bastion of support for the Republican Party. So, naturally enough, the White House has largely ignored the indigenous dissident movement in favor of the exiles' id
It's a good point, although I would qualify it by noting that many, perhaps even most, Miami Cuban exiles are not former Batista cronies (or the children of Batista cronies). Many came over in the Mariel boatlift or the Pedro Pan flights, or were exiled as dissidents. However, most of the leadership of the exile community does seem to have Batista connections. The vast majority of exiles would benefit tremendously from not electing representatives who share the plutocratic tendencies of the Batista dictatorship, but for whatever reason, they've thrown in their lot with people obsessed with turning back the clock fifty years.
June 6, 2005 8:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
... Bush administration policy was driven by well-organised ethnic and economic interest groups that had pre-existing agendas for world politics (strengthening Israel's ability to colonise the West Bank and Jerusalem, gaining access to rents from oil production, replacing Russian influence in the 'stans, maintaining an economic blockade against Cuba), and the democracy veneer was just applied as and when it was useful for public relations.
But no one would believe that.
June 6, 2005 8:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
I just can't imagine the day Castro dies. They'll all feel like, err, err, like orphans ?
June 6, 2005 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Castro just might turn out to be as good a bogeyman as, say, Clinton. Then his excellent bogeymanness will live long after he's gone, for generations, maybe.
June 6, 2005 9:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
Wasn't it Dave Barry who suggested that the CIA's motto should be "Proudly overthrowing Fidel Castro since 1962?"
Julian Elson
June 6, 2005 10:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
20 years ago, even 10 years ago, the characterization of the squeakiest wheels in Miami as in some way related to Batista may have been, well, plausible.
But even the Cuban-American National Foundation has evolved. The facts are: people die. Babies grow up and become adults. And, with the exception of College Republicans, new generations tend to "mellow out" and become more liberal.
As James Fallows notes in his most recent/forthcoming pieces for The Atlantic Monthly, "big" things will happen when Castro dies.
What those things might be cannot be predicted using outdated models like the vaguely suggested above.
June 6, 2005 11:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm wondering why the exile lobby likes the embargo so much, when it's clearly not the most effective means of ousting Castro. Is it just continued hatred of Fidel for taking their property? Do they think that the embargo somehow makes possible a scenario in which they go back to Cuba as big winners and get back everything they lost? Do they have irrational belief in its efficacy despite the 45 years of failure?
June 6, 2005 11:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
"...descended as it is from the Battista dictatorship..."
This is an unoriginal lie, peddled for decades by the soft-on-Castro American left.
June 6, 2005 12:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
the guy who wrote "...descended as it is from the Battista dictatorship..." is actually a Cuban immigrant. What are your credentials, Anonymous Hero?
June 6, 2005 12:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
...is a "credential"? *LOL*
June 6, 2005 1:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm....say...maybe if Mr. Yglesias would use his Cuban-American "credentials" to spell Batista correctly and/or to actually name just who "is descended from the Battista (sic) leadership" and provide detail on just what their "leadership" role is in the Cuban exile community, everyone would be more comfortably with the credibility of his creds.
And then he might even amplify that by "descended from" he is implying a genetic mechanism is at play (similar to that which gives him creds?) or whether the Miami-Dade County Schools are to fault for indoctrinating the generations (it has been, you know, 46 years since Batista (no sic), was overthrown) of Cuban-Americans (all with creds?) in how to be "descendants of Battista"?
Ya' gotta laugh (credibly, of course)!
June 6, 2005 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Cubans exiles have changed a lot. I would venture that when relations are finally normalized between the US and Cuba, difficulties won't come from the exile community as a whole but rather from a few big families and corporations whose Cuban assets were confiscated in the early 60s, for instance Bacardi. Those entities have long, long memories.
June 6, 2005 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
One certainly should expect better insights on the Cuban exile community from a Cuban exile than from an Anonymous Hero. What's so funny about it?
June 7, 2005 5:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Where can I read an argument in favor of sanctions?
Seriously, what are they supposed to do? Can we agree that they will not remove Castro from power? If so what are they accomplishing?
Would free, unrestrained trade with the United States push the day Cuba has free elections off further? How?
What's going on?
June 7, 2005 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink