Petroleumworld`s
Opinion Forum:
viewpoints on issues in energy & international
politics.
Saturday's
Lagniappe
PostGlobal
: With
Castro ailing, America and Venezuela square off to direct Cuba's
future
We
asked Ibsen Martinez, Moises Naim and the other members of our
panel of commentators to answer this question.
Who
will dominate post-Fidel Cuba and does it matter for the world?
- David Ignatius
arcadio/www.caglecartoons.com
By
PostGlobal a conversation in global issues - Moderate by David
Ignatius and Fareed Zakaria / The Washington Post
From the Panel
- Moises Naim
Cuba Will Continue to Drive the U.S. Crazy
Washington, DC - As long as U.S. law forbids nearly any interaction
with Cuba, America will have no influence there and Hugo Chavez
will make sure that Cuba keeps driving the United States mad.
Countries often drive one another crazy because
of the disproportionate influence of special interests like
the Cuban lobby in the U.S. Think of the Bay of Pigs invasion
or the outsourcing of Castro's assassination to the Mafia. But
the problem is not only that this lobby drives the United States
to do idiotic things but that it also induces an acute amnesia
in U.S. politicians, which makes them forget everything the
world has painfully learned about the transition from communism.
As I've argued before in a column for Foreign
Policy, this knowledge can be distilled into five simple maxims:
Lesson one: Failure is more common than success in the transition
to a democratic market economy. Lesson two: The less internationally
integrated, more centralized, and more personalized a former
communist regime was, the more traumatic and unsuccessful its
transition will be. Lesson three: Dismantling a communist state
is far easier and faster than building a functional replacement
for it. Lesson four: The brutal, criminal ways of a powerful
Communist party with a tight grip on public institutions are
usually supplanted by the brutal, criminal ways of powerful
private business conglomerates with a tight grip on public institutions.
Lesson five: Introducing a market economy without a strong and
effective state capable of regulating it gives resourceful entrepreneurs
more of an incentive to emulate Al Capone than Bill Gates.
So, when Fidel finally leaves the scene, Cuba
will likely end up looking more like Albania than the Bahamas.
Yet U.S. planners assume, as they did with Iraq, that democracy
will instantly emerge and that exiles will lead other investors
in transforming the country into a capitalist paradise.
More likely is that instead of a massive flow
of foreign investment into Cuba, the United States will get
a massive inflow of refugees fleeing chaos on the island. (Hence
Cuban-born Florida Senator Mel Martinez's appeal for people
to stay put after Castro dies.) Frictions between Cuban-Cubans
and Miami-Cubans will make politics nasty and unstable. And
because the Cuban public sector is inextricably intertwined
with the Communist Party, the demise of the party will paralyze
the government.
Absurdly, the World Bank, the Inter-American
Development Bank and the International Monetary Fund are forbidden
by the United States from spending even a dollar preparing for
this coming chaos.
It is into this vacuum that Venezuela's president,
Hugo Chavez, plans to step. Chavez -- flush with oil cash --
will instantly extend the hand of friendship to Raul Castro.
The deliveries of cheap oil will continue as Venezuela steps
up its sponsorship of the Cuban economy. Meanwhile, the U.S.
embargo will remain. Cementing the alliance with post-Fidel
Cuba will be Chavez's top foreign policy priority. By contrast,
Bush has his hands full, to put it politely, with the Middle
East right now. Hugo Chavez will gleefully exploit this situation,
influencing Cuba and driving the United States mad.
By Moises Naim | August 4, 2006
- Ibsen Martinez
Give Latin American Diplomacy a Chance
Caracas, Venezuela - Once Castro dies, the Cuban lobby in Miami
must not prevent Washington from pursuing a cautious, constructive
strategy for democratic transition on the island. Despite numerous
left-leaning, anti-American governments across Latin America,
Washington's best option is nevertheless to give Inter-American
diplomacy a chance.
I don't think I am being a dreamy little-leaguer
when I say that multinational Latin American diplomacy has been
more successful in the past than the U.S. State Department's
unilateral initiatives. Consider the Contadura Group and the
Esquipulas Agreement Group back in the eighties. They certainly
attained what the so-called Reagan Plan could not. The Cuban
"transition" is an even more acutely sensitive and
demanding task for the Inter-American community than the Central
American peace processes once were.
Alone, America faces many great challenges.
Chavez is ready to subsidize the Cuban economy once Fidel dies.
For all its faults, Cuba has symbolic value for many Latin American
citizens and governments, even the most democratic and pro-market
of the lot. Indeed, because of such anti-American sentiment,
Cuba's future is both a Latin American concern and Washington's.
Chavez is willing to shed much more than eighty
million dollars in order to be a broker in Cuba's political
future. A top American priority should be to defuse Latin American
mistrust by playing it cool and engaging regional governments
in needed diplomacy.
By Ibsen Martinez | August 4, 2006
- Masha Lipman
Either Way, Cuba Has a Rough Road Ahead
Moscow, Russia - The U.S. cannot afford to lose Cuba to Venezuela,
but the prospect of outright victory looks unlikely. Cuba probably
won't turn definitively in any direction. Instead, after Castro
Cuba may go through a period of governments of various leanings.
It might get bloody.
The competition over Cuba is going to be tough.
For way over four decades one U.S. administration after another
has tried to force a transition in Cuba, but achieved nothing.
The U.S. repeatedly tried to get rid of Castro, politically
and physically. It welcomed Cuban emigrants (the Central Intelligence
Agency even recruited them). The U.S. maintained an economic
embargo on Cuba and sought to win over Cuban souls by anti-Communist
broadcasting to the country. But Castro survived attempts on
his life, and his country held on in spite of the U.S. effort.
Now the stakes for the U.S. in general and the
Cuban exile community in the U.S. are extremely high. Chavez's
stake in Cuba may not be as long-term or emotionally-charged
as that of the U.S., but lately he's invested a lot in Cuba.
Venezuela supplies Cuba with cheap oil and is Cuba's leading
trade partner. Since the discovery of promising oil and gas
reserves in the North Cuba Basin in 2004 Venezuela has been
very active - not unsuccessfully - in participating in the exploration
of those reserves. Chavez is there already while the U.S. has
to decide whether the embargo on Cuba is still a good policy.
Whoever will be Cuba's leader after Fidel, whether
it be his brother Raul or somebody else from Castro's elite,
or whether it be several people at once, they will have to deal
with high expectations on the part of Cubans. Castro's unique
charisma and status made it possible for him to keep his countrymen
peaceful in spite of economic hardship and shortages. Nobody
else will be able to ensure this peace any longer. The post-Castro
government will have to make generous promises while deliveries
are bound to be scarce. In the meantime an array of forces will
intensify their effort to push Cuba to a transitional path of
their choice. These forces include others in the Cuban elite,
Cuban dissidents and democratic reformers, Cuban exiles in the
U.S., foreign actors, such as the U.S. government, and of course,
Hugo Chavez. In the meantime, immense Cuban problems require
a highly committed and cohesive government to launch and implement
reforms.
Over the years, with every commodity in shortage
the black market has become more entrenched in every day life.
And contrary to what one may think, a black-market economy is
not a good training ground for a market economy. It may teach
people how to make a profit, but it also leads to deep criminalization
of economic relations. A transition from a black market to fair
rules for all is a hard and long road to follow. In a situation
of transition and uncertainty, criminal groups can easily gain
a lot of authority.
Democracy and a market economy may sound like
an attractive option, especially since Cuban exiles in the U.S.
are an excellent example of how beneficial this choice can be.
But if Cuba departs on a democratic transition the problem will
be whether Cubans will have the perseverance needed to live
through the hard early years. What helped Central European countries
and Baltic States during that transitional period was the belief
that they had been liberated from an oppressive and alien outside
force. Cuba will not have that going for them. Their communism
was their own choice, genuine and unimposed.
Speaking from the height, or shall I say the
depth, of Russia's experience I can say that lingering public
attitudes are a key obstacle to democratic and market transition.
Paternalistic regimes make people unwilling to take initiative,
make them expect benefits from the state and make them blame
their hard situations on anyone but themselves. Egalitarianism,
even if hypocritical, has its attraction -- especially as an
old lifestyle collapses and frustration and confusion sets in.
People seek relief in a nostalgia for the "time-before-change."
The Cuban exile community may be of great help
to the country with its professional skills and business and
political connections in the U.S. Of course money will be useful
too, but will the exiles be able to show tolerance and restrain
their urge to arrange things in Cuba in a way they see fit?
They've waited for almost five decades after all!
Cuba will not be like East Germany which was
taken over by a bigger, wealthier and more successful brother.
Moreover, there are obvious differences in the exile community
on U.S. policy with regard to Cuba. All U.S. administrations
since the Cuban revolution in 1959 pursued the policy of embargoes
and pressed for a regime change. The current administration
of G.W. Bush has proclaimed democratization as its global mission,
and as the developments in Iraq show, has implemented it with
full disregard for the situation on the ground or human nature
in general. This leaves little chance that Bush administration
will show flexibility or understanding as far as the situation
and peoples' attitudes in Cuba are concerned. Caleb McCarry,
a "Cuba transition coordinator" appointed to this
position a couple years ago was recently quoted in The New Yorker
as saying that his "function is to be... in charge of planning
and supporting a genuine democratic transition in Cuba."
McCarry added, "We will continue to offer support for a
real transition."
If those in charge of Cuban policy in the U.S.
share this thinking then there is little hope that the U.S.
will act in a subtle and wise fashion as the situation in Cuba
requires. According to The New Yorker, two leading Cuban dissidents
characterized the tactic outlined by McCarry as "meddling",
"counterproductive", and "heavy-handed.
All the above factors make Cubans more responsive
to a figure such as Chavez and to his boisterous populism. To
be fair, not everybody in Cuba either among the elites or among
the people will be happy to have a Chavez for a mentor or patron.
Moreover, it is not at all clear whether Cuba might indeed opt
soon for a democratic path in a situation where Chavez would
become a challenger to Cuba's developments. Alternatively, he
may be more successful in early stages of post-Castro Cuba with
the U.S. as the challenger to his popularity. It is also possible
that both these actors remain outsiders for a time while Cuba
remains under some sort of post-Castro authoritarian of its
own making. Nevertheless, the their competition for control
will be severe.
By Masha Lipman | August 4, 2006
-
Helena Luczywo
Chavez
Offers More of the Same: Populism and Poverty
Warsaw, Poland - It is up to eleven million Cubans living on
the island and two million emigrants and refugees to decide
whether or not they want to adopt a system based on freedom,
democracy and pluralism.
The U.S. administration must tackle the post-Castro
transition with tact and respect for the Cuban people. They
must reduce their role to assisting a sovereign Cuban government.
It does matter whether Cuba takes the road to freedom and democracy
or whether it keeps going down the path of populism, poverty
and authoritarianism. What Chavez has to offer is what Cuba
has known for forty-seven years of isolation. If the Cuban transition
to democracy proves successful, it will be an example for others
to follow like Spain, Brazil or Chile.
By
Helena Luczywo | August 4, 2006
