[NYTr] Educating Raul (There's No Educating Bush)

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

[The Guardian and the Economist - two British views on Raul's first year
as acting president.  -NY Transfer]


The Guardian - Aug 3, 2007
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ben_whitford/2007/08/a_year_ago_this_week.html

Educating Raúl

by Ben Whitford

A year ago this week, there was dancing in the streets of Miami as an
ailing Fidel Castro temporarily ceded control of Cuba to his brother
Raúl.

Rumors of Fidel's imminent death abounded. Analysts anticipated the
speedy downfall of the country's communist regime. The White House
issued stern warnings about what would and would not be tolerated in
the "new Cuba". Almost everyone agreed that the country had reached a
watershed, and that a radical shake-up, for better or worse, was
inevitable.

Twelve months later, the surprising thing is how little has changed.
Fidel's health may still be shaky, but he has swapped his uniform for a
tracksuit - the well-dressed Cuban retiree's outfit of choice - and
appears to be enjoying his new role as newspaper columnist and dictator
emeritus. With his brother's blessing, Raúl has consolidated power with
remarkable ease; and under his de facto leadership, Cuba has returned
to business as usual. The communist regime may be under new
stewardship, but it appears as securely ensconced as ever.

But while Cubans have begun to adapt to the new political landscape,
the Bush administration is still clinging to its belief that Fidel's
death, when it finally comes, will prove the panacea for all that ails
Cuba. President Bush was recently caught daydreaming about the day "the
good Lord will take Fidel Castro away", saying it would usher in a new
and democratic dawn for America's island neighbour. In the meantime,
there's little stomach in Washington for any re-evaluation of
Cuban-American relations. Recent attempts to loosen the economic
embargo were unceremoniously shot down, and - as Barack Obama recently
discovered - even mentioning the idea of direct engagement with Havana
remains politically risky.

A year ago, an isolationist, wait-and-see approach made some sense:
pretty much everyone believed that control of Cuba would have to be
wrenched out of Castro the Elder's cold, dead hands. Had the comandante
died before naming a successor, it would have set the stage for a
divisive power struggle for which Raúl - the most obvious
leader-in-waiting - seemingly had neither appetite nor aptitude. The
resultant chaos might easily have created a window of opportunity for
the US to push for the dismantling of Cuba's one-party system and to
begin to broker genuine democratic reform.

These days, though, Bush's strategy doesn't seem so smart. By
sidelining himself, Fidel has been able to anoint his brother and
personally oversee an orderly transition of power. While his eventual
death will still shake Cuba, it is unlikely to mean the end for the
regime he founded. The question now is less whether Cuba's communist
government will continue than what trajectory it will take. Raúl may
lack his brother's charisma and barnstorming oratory, but he is a
shrewd, businesslike politician well aware of the need for reform.
Significant changes are unlikely while Fidel is alive, but Raúl has
already taken a more conciliatory approach to the US, and appears to be
tentatively laying the groundwork for a move towards Chinese-style
"free market communism".

Political reforms are not high on his agenda, and there will still be
plenty for human rights advocates to complain about; but Raúl appears
determined to correct at least some of his brother's excesses and to
build a more viable economic system.

Washington's reluctance to address Havana's new political reality
speaks to the long shadow Fidel Castro still casts over Cuban-American
relations - and the enduring influence of Miami's Calle Ocho
hardliners, who have built a thriving cottage industry dedicated to
demonising the Cuban leader. As long as Fidel has a pulse, any easing
of America's stance towards Cuba will be taken as an act of appeasement
by Florida's Cuban-American exile community; and few politicians have
the cojones to pick that fight, especially with an election on the way.

Still, many in Washington are uncomfortable with the largely irrational
policies foisted on them by the Cuban-American lobby. There's a good
chance that Fidel's death, when it comes, will be taken as a welcome
excuse to reformulate America's relationship with her Caribbean
neighbour. The anti-Castro hardliners wouldn't like it, but much of
their support and influence is derived from the exile community's
knee-jerk aversion to Fidel. After his demise, many Cuban-Americans
would be more amenable to a normalisation of relations between the two
countries. Ironically, when Fidel finally does shuffle off to the great
Tropicana Club in the sky, it may spark more sweeping changes in
Washington than in Havana.

                               ***

The Economist - Aug 2, 2007
http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9597369

Cuba:

Conceptual change

Raúl Castro sets out his stall while Fidel hovers in the background

A YEAR ago this week, Fidel Castro announced that he required
intestinal surgery and that he had temporarily turned over his powers
as Cuba's head of state and government to his slightly younger brother,
Raúl. One year on, by all accounts, Fidel Castro continues to recover
from complications that almost killed him. But it is slowly dawning on
Cubans that change and the post-Fidel era have begun.

To most outward appearances, everything in the communist island remains
the same. Most of the observable differences are cosmetic. There are
fewer government-organised mass rallies. Television schedules are no
longer re-arranged around Fidel's lengthy musings and eccentric
schedule. Raúl likes to keep normal office hours.

The clearest sign so far that deeper change is afoot came on July 26th,
the official anniversary of the start of the revolution. Fidel would
use the occasion to expatiate on the statistics of Cuban economic
triumphs, or to excoriate the enemy across the water in the United
States. By contrast, Raúl Castro's hour-long speech to a crowd of
100,000 in Camaguey contained some unusually sharp criticism of Cuba's
own shortcomings.

The standard wage of around $15 a month was “clearly insufficient to
satisfy all needs,” he said, stating the previously unutterable
obvious. This was the main cause of “social indiscipline” (ie, the
black market, which Fidel has tended to blame on personal greed).
“Structural and conceptual changes will have to be introduced” to raise
productivity, Raúl went on. By way of example, he singled out as
“absurd” the centralised system for producing milk. He also called for
more foreign investment, and invited America's next president to “talk
in a civilised manner” to Cuba.

“Raúl is raising new expectations,” says Oscar Espinosa Chepe, a
dissident economist. Can he satisfy them? As long as Fidel lives,
reformers within the leadership will have to be cautious. Hardliners
will put up less resistance against economic reform than against any
loosening of one-party control. Still, there is no longer much talk of
the elder Mr Castro returning to power.

Apart from seeing the occasional visitor, Fidel's only public activity
is publishing articles in the official newspaper, Granma. After four
articles about the doings of Cuba's athletes at the Pan-American Games,
his column this week returned to politics. It gave warning that “no one
should entertain the slightest illusion” that the United States will
negotiate with Cuba and noted that he is consulted on “every important
decision”. Maybe, but it now looks as if Raúl, not Fidel, is the man
who makes them.