Bush urged to intervene after Castro's death
A new high level report to be published this week urges the United States to be prepared to intervene in Cuba following the death of Fidel Castro to ensure that the island can enjoy the benefits of a speedy transition towards "democracy and political freedom".
There is no hint that the eighty year old Cuban leader is unwell and plans are already afoot for him to hand over power when he dies to his brother, Raul.
The recommendations, which include the creation of an $80m (£43m) fund to promote democracy in Cuba, are contained in the latest report compiled by the Commission for Assitance to a Free Cuba, created by President George Bush three years ago. The group is co-chaired by the US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, and by the US Commerce Secretary, Carlos Gutierrez, a Cuban-American.
A classified annexe to the document lists future measures the US should consider further to undermine the regime of Mr Castro, who has led the island since 1959. The report's release, probably this Wednesday, is certain further to aggravate already tense relations between the two governments.
The president of the Cuban parliament, Ricardo Alarcon, condemned the report over the weekend, describing its publication as an act of war. "What's most important is that they admit to a secret plan to overthrow another government," Mr Alarcon told reporters. "What on earth could the secret part say when the public part violates all kinds of international law?"
The United States' obsession with Cuba has always struck me as comical. That a superpower should spend so much of it's time worrying about a gnat ninety miles from Key West is simply ludicrous.
The report focuses on the possibility that the death of Mr Castro will nonetheless mark the beginning of a process of transition towards democracy, however gradual. It argues that the US should be ready to give a transitional government any assistance it requests, for instance in maintaining health care or power supplies, or training judges and police.
I find it impossible to believe that even the people who wrote the report seriously believe that any transitional government would request assistance from a regime that have spent the last forty odd years attempting to destablise the country.
Is there no nation on Earth that the Bushites will simply let be?
Click title for full article.
5 comments:
Kel,
The official US policy towards Cuba has been a strange feature on the political landscape here for years. It really has made no sense since the Soviet Union collapsed. There is a tacit understanding that Cuba is no threat and many Americans now make their way there for vacations, etc. Of course, they have to fly there via Canada (Toronto, usually). Americans, in general, exhibit no concerns about Cuba and, in fact, now view it as a destination. Hell, even Tom DeLay loves his Cuban cigars, which are strictly illegal here.
I've always thought that the US simply hated the fact that Castro took away one the US's favourite vacation spots; a nearby foriegn country repleat with gambling, an illicit, thriving sex trade and a appreciated, secret clubiness that was attractive to all manner of criminal, including our upper class politicians. Havana was the sexy spot of the Caribbean until Castro took it away. Now, wealthy jerk-offs, armed with bottles of Viagra, go to Dominican Republican for their kink fixes.
At least, that's my theory. I can't think of any rational reason for it other than inertial foreign policy and political intrasigence and that one of the premier party spots of the Western Hemisphere was taken off the American menu of fun in the sun.
Bhc,
That's hysterical. Because there really doesn't seem to be any cogency to the American position.
So you might be right, it may be as simple as he spoiled their party.
After all the whole of South America is electing Socialist governments so why single out Castro?
After all the whole of South America is electing Socialist governments so why single out Castro?
Castro was an elected socialist? Since when?
The reason for the greater interest in Cuba than other leftist governments in the area is its historical role as a Soviet proxy, such as during the Cuban missle crisis where it represented a real threat to the United States, and as an exporter of "revolution" throughout Latin America and other countries (such as Venezuela today or Angola back in the '80s).
Obviously, the fact that the United States has a large Cuban exile population is another reason.
I hope the United States does intervene after Castro is gone and aids the country in developing democratic institutions. Let the Cubans decide what kind of government they want. I think it is a country with a lot of potential.
I didn't say that Castro was elected, I see you're having to use your disingenuous debating style again.
And the fact that the Soviet Union has collapsed makes your nation's obsession with Cuba even more bizarre.
Tommy,
You are aware of the fact that the US had been complicit in precipitating the missile crises by previously installing US medium range ballistic missiles on Turkey's border with Russia. The Cuban missile crises didn't just spontaneously pop out of nowhere.
Nonetheless, I think it would behoove the US to constructively engage the Cuban people with the goal of making them realise that, economically, they might be getting a somewhat raw deal from the Castro regime. This might not be viewed as quite the boon to the citizens as we would like to believe, though, as education is freely available and seems to be quite goood as is health care, which ranks well against other western industrialized nations. Cubans are seen to suffer from material deprivation and, of course, dissidents pay a harsh price for speaking out against Castro, something I find to be most repugnant about his regime.
Post a Comment