skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Odds and ends
- El Nuevo Herald reports declining numbers of Cubans entering the United States without a visa in the first half of fiscal year 2009.
- “It is all about the people, not the regime.” An op-ed by Carlos Saladrigas of the Cuba Study Group supporting the end of travel restrictions on all Americans.
- The Miami Herald reports on a discussion of this book on the use of Che Guevara’s image. A review from former Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega is here.
- Daily News: A documentary on the return to Cuba after 46 years of pitcher Luis Tiant.
- In El Tono de la Voz, a discussion of the draft Cuba resolution of the Latin America Studies Association. It’s about U.S. diplomatic relations with Cuba, but it “urges the United States and Cuba to permit…travel by Cubans to the United States to attend conferences and by U. S. academics to attend scholarly conferences in Cuba and academics from Cuba to teach and lecture in the United States.”
29 comments:
First we had Elvis' sightings. Now we will have Fidel's sightings. Reminds of an Ellen Degeneres' joke that her grandmother started walking 3 miles every day when she turns 80. Now she is 90 years old and nobody knows where the h*** she is! Cuba being an island I am pretry sure FC would not wander far. Maybe he will become the Wanderer in Chief or inspire a new book series: Where's Fidel?
Advice for the day: Don't kiss any pigs! Gusanos are OK though.
Vecino de NF
Phil Peters,
There was one minor odd and end that you left out. The Cuban National Defense Council got together last week presided by "Raúl" as per Granma's weekend edition. Ostensibly they discussed the recovery from the last year's hurricanes. Apparently tuti mondi attended although no names were given. The picture shows Machado Ventura and a few other people that do not jog the memory right away.
Rather odd!
Vecino de NF
urges the United States and Cuba to permit…travel by Cubans to the United States...LASA should not forget about the musicians and artists (and everyone else) who get denied entry to the US, unless they are regime opponents, of course. The Cuban hip-hop group Orishas was denied entry to the US to play at the New Orleans jazz festival this weekend.
It is amazing to think about how many different areas of US policy need to change before we can call things normal. It also puts into perspective how minor the changes made by Obama were.
BTW, the "Open Source Center" has put together a current Cuban Leadership chart and overview - showing the names and faces of all members of the Political Bureau, the Council of State, the Secretariat, all Ministers, the Council of Ministers, etc.
"how many different areas of US policy need to change"
um, leftside, what about the Castro regime? doesn't it need to change too?
anon 141, now that's a good point. we're talking about US-Cuba relations and how US policies affect Cuba in so many ways. tell me how the Cuban embargo on American works. its US policy that makes it tough on certain Cuban artists etc to get into US, that's the point. america is discriminating, restricting and prohibiting. whether the castro regime has to change is not the point, the americans have to end the war and lift the siege.
anonimo
Leftside,
Thanks for the link! A nice single page summary of the players. One thing that jumps out is the relative advanced age of the most senior members.
Vecino de NF
that is a problem, it is very hard for the old guard to let go of the levers of power to the newer generation when the country remains under siege. normalization may result in some of that change to take place. assume you saw pablo milanes' comments on this and his comments on the need for socialism in cuba to advance. under the continued national security threats its hard for the first generation of revolutionaries to let go.
anonimo
The Politburo seemed pretty old, but the new Council of State is pretty young - and diverse. At least 9 of the 21 Council of State members are black.
Anonimo,
The problem with the old guard letting go of their privileges is largely due to their lack of trust on being taken care by the next generation. This is not new to Cuban history. It led to the revolution of the 1930s, and then to the 1959 revolution. In both cases the new generation chafed under the choices made by the previous generation. What makes this situation different this time around, it's that the Cuban population has been aging rapidly (it the oldest or second oldest in Latin America and the Caribbean?) and that the traditional method of securing one's retirement from political life by setting up bank accounts, etc abroad have been heavily curtailed under the current government because that would amount to treason. Both of these have curtailed a nice old age retirement whether in Cuba or abroad for the political elite. They know it and that's why they prefer to die in situ and in power.
Vecino de NF
Leftside,
Please remember that due to democratic centralism, the Politburo is the organization that counts. The Council of State is there to assume the functions of the National Assembly between its brief semi-annual sessions, and the National Assembly is just a rubber stamp for the Central Committee.
The presence of blacks and women in the Cuban government should be welcome but like I said the real power is in the Central Committee. Diversity without real power is just tokenism.
US should focus on talking to those that are in the Politburo. If they appear in all three institutions then they are more powerful. Having said that, if the US is not talking to Raul and Fidel or their designated representatives, they are just talking to those that will be purged next.
Vecino de NF
los van van too. they rock!
the 1959 revolution was not predominantly generational, it was the continuation and fulfillment of that what was denied in 1898. having said that, of course revolutions have generational qualities to them, almost impossible not to. age most often equates to status quo and reactionary.
cuba is losing too many young minds and hopefully when the americans end the war and siege that may slow down as well.
my point is national security concerns tend to help solidify the hesitancy for change. i thought fidel had millions stuffed away in foreign banks. well that's what forbes said, je je
anonimo
Anonimo,
Fidel's and Raúl's retirement strategy set aside, the reality is that in Cuba your standard of living is directly correlated to your political importance. So by not being "in power" you lose access to better housing, transportation, food, travel, etc. To dispute that is in your own words not to live in the real world.
As far as the aging of Cuba, it is not necessarily linked to migration but rather to the fact that fertility rates in Cuba have collapsed to levels well below the replacement rate required to maintain a stable population. Some have said that Cuban women have voted with their wombs. Whatever the reason this has been well documented by Cuban government institutions in the press and in official publications.
Now to say that the 1959 revolution was not generational is once again to ignore history. Except for some "old" youngsters like Roa and Rodriguez, all the leadership was made up of 30 somethings who kicked out of power the previous generation that came to power in the 1930s after kicking out of power the aging mambises. It is nice to think that Cuban history was a rather deterministic flow from 1492 forward but the reality is that Cuban history has as many twists and turns as the history of any other collection of humans. Justifying the last 50 years of Cuban history based on the prior 50 years is nothing more than begging the question of why did you do a revolution?
BTW although the current leadership may not have a nice retirement strategy for themselves, they have been extremely busy placing their children abroad. You can not take a step in Miami or in Madrid without bumping into hijos e hijas de Papis revolucionarios (sons and daughters of revolutionary daddys). Many times their life abroad is financed with funds from the Revolution.
Vecino de NF
so, ano, what you're saying is that the Cuban regime has to negotiate NOTHING. All the concessions must be by the United States. That will really get far...
chingon
chingon
no, i did not say the cuban regime has nothing to negotiate. there's plenty to negotiate when the two sides sit down to talk. but cuba does not have to negotiate its internal political or economic systems, no more than the Americans have to. the cubans aren't asking the americans to change their system; the americans are demanding cuba change theirs. it's not a concession to expect the americans to end their hostility against cuba. for american to end its dictatorial policies against cuba. or are you in favor of the embargo, helms burton, toricelli, commission for assistance to a free cuba. these are policies that are extremely hostile, aggressive and illegal.
it's priority, end the crime first.
anonimo
vecino.
i know lots of cubans not in the party who live quite well. being a party member isn't as important as it used to be. obviously there are benefits, but making general statements like that does reduce your cred. how many of the 11 million cubans are party members now? is it even a majority? but if your point is political membership provides access to privilege, please let me know one country where that doesn't occur.
and i know a number of cubans well up in the government who don't have cars, just a small apt, no better food, never traveled. and i personally know cubans who quit the party, or never been a member, who have traveled, live in nice neighborhoods like alta habana, have better food and one even has a nissan sentra. i really hate anecdotal incidents or sweeping generalizations, because it's a reflection of a lazy argument, and can Always been countered with alternative anecdotes.
i never said the 59 revolution wasn't generational, please read my posts more carefully. of course it had generational influences, what revolution doesnt. one revolts against the status quo, which obviously usually represents the established order, and that implies a generational reflection of power. but fidel's revolution was more importantly the fulfillment of the independence that was pre-empted by the americans in 1898 and postponed in 1933. there is a direct line from marti to fidel and their aspirations for self-determination, even specific social justice programs. that the americans prevented that for 50 years is beyond historic dispute; if you want to argue that then go ahead, it should be interesting.
so, the past 50 years are directly related to the previous half-century. if not, what if any impact did the american hegemony over cuba have? what then was the revolution for, indeed. to clarify your position, are you saying the Cuban revolution was just because the leaders of 33 were getting old? and are you saying the revolution wasn't against american control? it seems you have said many times that the revolution was based and maintains itself because of anti-americanism. or am i mis-interpeting?
and where did i imply cuban history is linear? or are you just stating an obvious, like the color of the sky. mine's blue. be careful with extrapolations that have no basis in fact.
birth rates dropped dramatically from 1989 to the mid 90s during the worst of the special period. young people were more worried about surviving, delaying marriages, putting off babies. the special period was the seminal moment in current cuban history, most relate stories to pre and post special period. that combined with immigration has had a negative impact. it is a concern for the cuban govt.
please provide proof that there are funds taken from the revolution being specifically used to finance hijos and hijas abroad. its so easy to accuse and make propaganda, that's what the gusanos do. have been doing it for 50 years. but im sure you are not one.
anonimo
but Obama said is that "liberty" will drive his approach to Cuba. How do you reach "liberty" if you say the regime is not under any obligation to make internal reforms of its dictatorial system?
chingon
The low Cuban birth rates, like anywhere, are more a result of high human development rather than underdevelopment. Of course there are unique Cuban circumstances, such as housing shortages, that also play a role...
Chingon, you are right to note that Obama has set himself a high bar - the same as the previous 10 Presidents. "Freedom," "liberty," "democracy" -words that can mean anything to anyone but in American thought, usually mean allowing the owners of property and business (including American) a free reign to exploit and run things. The Cuban Constitution (with its insistence on justice and ethics) would have to be thrown out the window. Fortunately, I am starting to get the sense Obama is a smarter and more practical man than the rest - and he has more room to manuever.
Check the recent Washington Post polling, which had some questions on Cuba. 61% vs 28% approve of the way he's handing Cuba. 57 vs 36 (an all time high) think we ought to end the trade embargo. Amazingly, fewer Americans (55%) think we ought to end the travel bans (on US citizens and Cubans).
Leftoide wrote: "The low Cuban birth rates, like anywhere, are more a result of high human development rather than underdevelopment."
Hmmm, this must be why the Gulag Archipelago had such a low birthrate, too. What would we ever do without your principled thinking and clear insights, Lefty?
" "Freedom," "liberty," "democracy" -words that can mean anything to anyone but in American thought, usually mean allowing the owners of property and business (including American) a free reign to exploit and run things."
Yeah, the disgraceful capitalista notion that people somehow have a "right" to run things, such as their own lives and their own property!!! Thanks again, Lefty.
"The Cuban Constitution (with its insistence on justice and ethics) would have to be thrown out the window."
Yeah, what a tragedy if the Cuban constitution, with its devotion to the essentials of justice such as an independent judiciary, fair trials, free speech and the "ethics" lovingly implanted into the regrettably stubborn inmates of Villa Marista, were to be thrown out the window! Ah, Lefty, if only Comrade Stalin was still around: he would give you a medal!
chingon
just because a foreign power defines terms to be imposed upon a sovereign nation doesn't imply they have any meaning. american said they brought 'freedom' to the cubans in 1898. freedom meant neo-colonial control. liberty at the point of a gun is not liberty -- its simply a threat
anonimo
anon 825 -- such rhetoric from someone who doesn't even put a name to his rantings.
american democracy is defined under their terms. it means serving american interests first under economic and political systems acceptable under their advantage. it is the consistent canard they use in their transparent attempts to convince the world of their moral authority. where does torturing innocents fit in to liberty, freedom or democracy?
they brought freedom, liberty and democracy to cuba in 1898. freedom to colonize cuba, liberty to impose economic systems that favored american interests first, and democracy to be subservient to american demands.
ahh, but that was way back when. what about now? yes, american brought freedom, liberty and democracy to Iraq by destroying the country and causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
they have no use for democracy when hamas or chavez is elected, and they punish those who vote for those do. They defeat not defend democracy in Haiti. and they make sure their pronouncements of those fine ideals are used in service for hegemony. they have their own imperial agenda internationally, as any empire has done. what makes the american empire so unique is that they won't admit it, and people like you swallow the propaganda whole. take time to look at things as they really are, move away from childish pronouncement that sound great, but look at the actions, not the words.
america's political and economic systems is one of the finest in the world, for americans. it is their foreign policy that has been so disingenuous, destructive and hypocritical (as any empires is) -- so if you want to keep believing in the fairy tale of bringing liberty, freedom and democracy to anyone, go right ahead. but maybe you should live in the real world, take those blinkers off and give it your best shot at seeing things from the other side. whoever you are. Gus?
anonimo
Anonimo,
You asked to "please provide proof that there are funds taken from the revolution being specifically used to finance hijos and hijas abroad."
I remember reading an article in the Miami Herald on this topic. I could do the research for you but if you are in a hurry you can search for it yourself. In terms of others close to the revolutionary elites who have settled abroad there are at least two that come to mind: the daughter of Carlos Rafael Rodriguez in Spain, and Vilma Espín's brothers who went to Ecuador. There is also talk of one of Raul Castro's daughter having settled in Italy, and running some kind of business financed with either Cuban government's monies or through the Bacardi shares her family had. I personally have come accross a few individuals who after some reticence admit being the son or daughter of relatively high ranking government officials and when they describe their leaving Cuba is not the usual sturm und drang that almost all Cubans have to go through to emigrate from Cuba. They did not fit there, and their daddies were happy to find them a better place to live, sometimes with the use of relatives abroad, at other times with some settlement money and contacts. I am not going to betray any further confidences. I wish I could give you more details but I am not the editor of Cuban Hola.
My point on the 1959 revolution is that the generation that came of age in the 1950s rightly perceived the Batista takeover in 1952 as a maneuver by an old guard that govern Cuba from 1934 to 1944 to keep political power. BTW this was not limited to Castro and his allies, it applied to all the other groups that oppose Batista. (The example of Machado's constitutional maneuvers were still pretty fresh in people's minds). In my view the anti-US rethoric have been used by the Castro government as an ideological rationale but I honestly doubt that in 1958 any poll of Cuban political opinion would have listed throwing out the Yankees as the #1 issue for Cubans. If there is such a poll, I would like to see it.
The problem with jettisoning the anti-US rethoric as part and parcel of normal relations between the US and Cuba is that all other internal issues in Cuba have to be discussed on their merits and the justification for centralized militarized power is gone. It remains to be seen if the current political system can survive its own contradictions.
Vecino de NF
so you think every discussion on internal matters in cuba is based on anti-americanism.
how did raul's decision to decentralize the agriculture ministry fall into that.
the current political system is far more entrenched than your superficial perspective
and that's what the anti-castro side just won't ever accept; that the majority of cubans see their government as legitimate
no other opinion matters
anonimo
Anonimo,
I thought that the turning over of idle lands to private farmers was justified in terms of providing food security for the nation in the face of the embargo. I am paraphasing how Granma explained it but you get the drift, right?
I agree with you that the type of Cuban government and how it works should be based on the opinions of Cubans. I would include in that group Cubans who disagree with the current government, and Cubans citizens who live outside of Cuba and who are considered Cubans under the current Cuban legislation. Do you agree with me, or would you limit the right to decide on the type and scope of the Cuban government to those Cubans who agree with current Cuban government?
Vecino de NF
those cubans living in cuba have much higher priority to decide the future than any others.
do you think all cubans in cuba entirely agree with their government? there is tremendous difference of opinion and that will be apparent once the need for unity under the siege mentality is over.
im not say the exiles won't have influence, even the cuban government recognizes that. but the deciding factors belong to the cubans living in cuba.
cuba does not need any achmed chabalis.
do not understand how you equate decentralization of ag ministry as connected to anti-american. its a recognition of flaws of cuban system and trying to correct it
anonimo
Anonimo,
Re. agricultural decentralization I was paraphrasing Granma's announcement. If you want a direct quote, you can look it up yourself.
As far as the Cubans outside of Cuba, I would agree with you in principle but current Cuban legislation does not differentiate between them and those in Cuba except in restricting their civil liberties even further (they can not vote), and giving them certain privileges (they do not need a Tarjeta Blanca to leave Cuba). It's a matter of law not opinion. But please let us know, if you are the judge and regulator of Cuban rights and privileges in Cuba and abroad. In that case, list your name and contact information so any appropriate inquiries be directed your way.
Vecino de NF
oye viejo, are you serious. first you say the legislation doesn't differentiate, then you point out how they do. gee guy, get something straight for once.
when raul sent out the survey that had millions in response, he sent it out to the cubans living in cuba, not those outside.
they don't need a tarjeta blanca to leave, well duh.
my opinion was that the cubans living inside cuba should have more influence. and they will. the cuban govt can listen to the exiles, and they have, but they won't have the same impact. nor should they.
you certainly give your opinion, disguised as fact, sin parar, without any backup of course.
ya
anonimo
Anonimo,
I said "... but current Cuban legislation does not differentiate between them and those in Cuba except in ...". Please note the "except in"! I noted that you did not refer to the Cubans inside of Cuba that differ with the Cuban government. Should their opinions count too?
Vecino de NF
PS What's the title of your book?
Post a Comment