Fidel Castro, the last truly iconic figure from the 20th century, is relinquishing power, at least officially.
By most measures, Castro has been an eminently successful dictator, unchallenged in a half century of authoritarian rule and surviving every attempt to assassinate or remove him by a powerful neighbor only 90 miles away. He is about to die of old age, still loved by many Cubans, and in his own country rather than the south of France.
No doubt there is rejoicing in Cuban prisons and universities, among American and Cuban businessmen and among cigar and vintage car aficionados around the world. There certainly is rejoicing among the Cuban exiles in south Florida, at least the older ones - the people who have pretty much determined American policy toward their homeland for the last five decades. It is difficult to become president without taking Florida, and it is difficult to take Florida without getting the Cuban vote.
Of the current presidential candidates, only Sen. Barack Obama says he will ease the embargo, but only to allow more family visits, which should play well with the exiles. Even this is too much for most politicians, as epitomized by the Cuban-born senator from south Florida, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. Ironically, with the departure of Sen. Tom Lantos, Ros-Lehtinen is now also the foremost Zionist in the Senate, unswervingly supporting the only other state besides Cuba whose relationship with America is determined by a domestic constituency rather than our national interests.
Our Cuba policy has been a disaster and just plain silly. It has achieved nothing as far as our national interests are concerned, except to deprive average Americans of fine cigars and vacations in Cuba. Economically, non-American companies are slowly penetrating Cuba, leaving our businessmen out in the cold. Castro's government has managed to survive the embargo by its most natural trading partner, even after the disappearance of its Soviet patron.
If anything, the embargo has aided Castro, providing him with a clear and easily understandable enemy within the reach of the island, and as we Americans now know, there is nothing like a foreign threat to quiet dissent and accustom people to loss of civic liberties. It appears that the superpower really is threatening the tiny island and punishing the Cubans for their government, which certainly never threatened the United States. And Castro need not explain the failures of his socialist economy; the U.S. has done it for him.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
The hypocrisy is blatant. We engaged the Soviet Union and even recognized the communist government of Vietnam. We have diplomatic relations with Syria, Korea and Sudan, and have sold our country to communist China when all of these states are far bigger violators of human rights.
Castro may have a repressive government and political prisoners, but he does not shoot people in the streets, run slave labor camps or engage in massive ethnic cleansing. There is a clear double standard determined by American economic interests and the Florida exile community.
I am not a fan of repression and failed collectivist economies, but we need to put Cuba in perspective. The average Cuban had, at least initially, a far better life than he or she did under the equally repressive and gangster-supported regime of Atencio Batista. Contrasted with the likes of Mao Zedong, Saddam Hussein, Kim Jong-il, the Somoza family, Jean-Claude Duvalier or Pervez Musharraf, Castro is a relatively benign autocrat.
He seems actually to care about his people and has regarded popular health care and education at least as important as his military, more so than some American administrations. Despite the dictatorship and wrecked economy, a poor Cuban enjoys a better life and less corrupt government than his counterpart in Mexico, a country that, in fact, has injured the U.S.
So, adios, Fidel. You did a better job than George Bush.
Finally, on a related note of limiting freedom: Regent Jack Fortner has just underscored what I have been saying for decades about the general unfitness of our politically appointed regents. By suggesting that UNM faculty and staff be prohibited from testifying against major boosters, he has demonstrated a complete lack of any idea of what a university is. Castro could easily relate to Fortner's vision of the academy.
Richard M. Berthold is a retired professor of classical history at UNM. He is the author of Rhodes in the Hellenistic Age.
