Posted on 06/23/2002 8:04:24 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Cuban President Fidel Castro may have made the biggest mistake of his political life last week. By imposing an amendment that would prohibit any future changes in Cuba's Socialist Constitution, he may guarantee that it will be scrapped altogether, and that nothing of his 4-decade-old regime will survive.
As you may know, the Castro regime last week collected 8.1 million signatures to request that Cuba's rubber-stamp National Assembly make the Socialist Constitution ''untouchable.'' The alleged signatures of 99.5 percent of Cuba's eligible voters were collected by Castro's neighborhood watch committees, whose evaluations of each citizen's political behavior can make or break people's lives in a country where the government controls virtually all jobs.
Castro's signature collection drive was a response to an unprecedented political offensive by Cuba's opposition. Taking advantage of a constitutional clause allowing petitions with at least 10,000 signatures to be submitted to the National Assembly, dissidents recently presented to the congress more than 11,000 signatures to convene a national referendum that would ask voters, among other things, whether they want freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, and the right to business ownership.
But Castro did not dare to ask the Cuban people which of the two proposals they favor. Instead, he ordered a signature collection drive with only one proposal -- his own. Now, the one-party National Assembly is expected to take up the government's ''referendum,'' and declare the Constitution ``untouchable.''
Castro may be shooting himself in the foot, in a big way. The opposition proposal, known as the Varela Project, would allow for peaceful and gradual change in Cuba, probably preserving many social laws that a sizable number of Cubans may want to keep.
Yet, by declaring the Constitution not amendable, Castro may be signing the death sentence of whatever is left of his four-decade-old regime.
The history of Latin America is replete with presidents-for-life who issued hundreds of constitutions, each announced as the definitive one, only to be discarded altogether once the political winds changed.
''Paradoxically, by trying to mummify the Cuban Constitution, the government may actually be declaring it irrelevant,'' says Robert Pastor, a former Carter administration official who visited Cuba last month with the former U.S. president. ``If it says this Constitution is beyond reproach, you will have to start with another Constitution.''
It's the paradox of the patriarch: By trying to prevent change, dictators who feel threatened by growing opposition often issue laws that invite their future abandonment and guarantee radical change.
For the first time in many years, the Castro regime is on the defensive. I cannot recall another instance in recent years in which Cuba's internal opposition -- despite its total lack of access to the media -- has taken the center stage of the country's political life.
In a telephone interview from Havana, opposition leader Oswaldo Payá, who organized the pro-freedom referendum drive, made precisely that point: Castro's refusal to allow the Cuban people to choose between the government and the opposition proposals is a sign of the regime's weakness.
In a clear sign that Castro knows he would lose a free vote, the Cuban strongman has not even allowed publication of the opposition's referendum proposal. If it weren't for Carter's public praise for it in a televised speech during his recent visit to Cuba, most Cubans wouldn't even know it existed.
''If they have 99 percent support of the people, as they say, why don't they allow publication of the Varela Project?'' Payá asked. ``Why don't they allow the Cuban people to hear about it through the mass media, which are paid for by all Cubans?
''Why don't we go to a public debate, in which Castro, [National Assembly President Ricardo] Alarcón and all of their top advisors get six hours to make their point, and I get 15 minutes?'' Payá asked. ``It may look like a presumption on my part, but they don't dare do it.''
So what will happen next? Castro's National Assembly is likely to declare the Constitution ''untouchable.'' It's not clear whether it will go further, and eliminate articles 66 and 88, which allow citizens to present petition drives to the National Assembly.
Either way, it's a win-win proposition for Cuba's political opposition, which is planning to go ahead with its constitutionally sanctioned right to make petitions to the National Assembly. According to some sources, it has already gathered nearly 30,000 signatures.
If the Castro regime ignores the opposition petition, it will be violating its own Constitution. If it eliminates the constitutional clause that allows citizens to request a referendum, it will be inviting radical change. In any case, an increasingly fearless opposition is becoming a key player in Cuba's political life, which is great news.
On June 22, 2002, The Cycle of Cuban Films of the Miami-Dade Community College presents at the Tower Theater in Miami a documentary about the Escambray saga written by Enrique Encinosa and directed by Pedro Suarez, titled "Al Filo del Machete" (At the Edge of the Sword). This film is part of the effort of the Institute of the Cuban Historic Memory against Totalitarianism to document little-known or twisted chapters of the armed struggle against Castro's tyranny since 1959. "Al Filo del Machete" presents the testimonies of a group of survivors who took part in the struggle for freedom during the 1960s in the Escambray Mountains in the center of the island and the urban struggle as well. Discredited as "bandits" for years by Castro's propaganda machine, this film documents why these peasants had no alternative but to fight back to a regime that was cutting off the most fundamental civil rights and liberties. Unfortunately, for the English-speaking American public that ignores the reality of the Castro regime, this documentary does not have English subtitles now, but hopefully will in the near future.
Another example of Castro's brutality was carried out in the early hours of April 17, 1961, when Castro ordered the massive detention of about 250,000 citizens suspected of being unsympathetic to his revolution, in order to cut off public support for the Bay of Pigs invasion. They were housed in stadiums, theaters and prisons. Many of them were executed or remained in prison. Once the invasion failed, Castro ordered the installation of dynamite in all jails housing his political prisoners, so that if another invasion occurred, they could be killed quickly.
If the Cuban people really love Castro and his regime, as some claim, why not hold free democratic elections in Cuba? Why not allow other political parties besides the Communist Party? Why not have a free press and freedom of expression for the citizens? Why no freedom of association and why automatically consider all private organizations illegal? Why can't parents educate their children according to their own beliefs? Why can't citizens own property and enter in business partnerships with foreigners? Why can't ordinary Cuban citizens enjoy the same facilities as foreigners? And the list of deprivation of the most elementary human rights goes on.
The notion that Castro was not and is still not opposed in Cuba is false. For 43 years he has been waging a war against Cubans, who, since 1959, rejected his betrayal of the democratic ideals of the political revolution against Batista. Castro has ruled and maintained power by repression, brutality and terror. Castro is involved not only in international terrorism but also in national terrorism directed against millions of citizens. This situation has affected all Cubans in all walks of life. That is why it is so inaccurate for the U.S. media and others to dismiss anti-Castro Cuban Americans as "upper class," "conservative," "right wing" and other negative and derogatory epithets very much in vogue and with the seal of approval of the far-left-engendered "political correctness."
Being anti-Castro is being pro-democracy and in support of human rights and the principles of the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution.***
How do we get our elected officials to believe in the U.S. Declaration of Independence and Constitution.
Castro will never leave power as long as the US gives him the means to be the only viable economic power in Cuba.
And you threw a hanging curve.
I'll give you this: your argument against the embargo is the only valid one. The left argues heart-breaking, humanitarian pleas. That you say it serves Castro politically is not to be dismissed. It does.
I'd weigh it against the larger context and conclude that the embargo is dead-on. We cannot in any way legitimize Castro.
We see this in this Herald article. It credits Jimmy Carter for the Castro's supposed error. Bull. Carter may have mentioned the opposition, but he shook Castro's hand.
I didn't see any slobber, but that doesn't mean it wasn't there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.