Cubans on Cuba & the USA: a few
discussions
emilito: March 20, 2010
Last saved May 16, 2010 22:34
Everyone
is curious, but friendship is so fragile
I have made it a point not to ask relatives or rugby players in Cuba to
weigh in with opinions on politics. So on our January tour I
respond to some of the people that accost me on the street, the
so-called jineteros, or hustlers. Usually for a beer and a
sandwich or a couple of dollars I can get some honest
information from them. These comments are a mixture of discussions
with people during both my January and February visits.
Iván
and
Samuel. Iván and Samuel are pseudonyms for a
couple of people with whom I was able to establish a relationship and
who hold opposite views on the effects of the Cuban government on their
lives.
The
embargo (which the Cubans call the "bloqueo," or blockade)
Iván, a proud supporter of the Revolution for all of his 30 or
so years, explains to me that, left to its own devices, the Cuban
economy would flourish, but that the US embargo - which he, and
apparently all Cubans - calls the "bloqueo," the blockade, has been
devastating. The
embargo, according to him, has masked what would undoubtedly have been
the successes of the
revolution.
Talk like this drives me crazy, because it's impossible to argue
against it. I'm convinced that, left to its own devices, the
Cuban economic system will not work: over the long run, after all,
Communism hasn't worked anywhere in the world. But if the intent
of the embargo has been to drive Cuba to its knees, it's done just the
opposite. By blaming the US, which Castro and all Cuban
publications refer to as "the Empire," Castro has united a large
segment of the Cuban people who see him as the one person that can keep
the US from once again taking control of Cuba's economy and pulling the
strings on its politics.
Iván states "things aren't perfect here, but they're imperfect
in our way, not yours."
Democracy
in Cuba
We discuss the subject of democracy in Cuba and Iván insists
that democracy is alive and well and that 95% of the people support the
Revolution and take part
in the electoral process. This process is totally driven from the
ground up, with
elections at the block level working all their way up to the national
assembly. Candidates put out their resume, but campaigning is not
allowed; people
decide who to vote for based on this resume, from which they learn
enough about them to make a decision. I am less than convinced.
And of course there's only one party. I tell him I think that's
outrageous.
"That's not outrageous at all," he replies. "Your country may
have
two parties, but as far as we're concerned, they're not very different;
they all operate as part of what we might call 'the capitalist
party.'
The point is that we select our candidates at the very local level, and
they act for us, their neighbors. And the same process moves up
until our national leaders are chosen. That is true democracy."
The
effects of tourism: vast disparities among people
I bring up the subject of tourism. "Your country, and
specifically Fidel, opposed tourism on moral grounds for many
years. And granted, I realize tourism brings certain undesirable
activity
with it, and I know that under Batista, prostitution and gambling were
rampant and that the revolution shut those activities down." (I don't
bring up the level of prostitution clearly in
evidence now; the security staff at the hotels tries to stop it, but
it's a hopeless task.)
"In fact, it's my understanding that contact between Cubans and
tourists was banned until the 1990s... But then, suddenly, when the
Soviet Union
collapsed, tourism becomes highly prized again. What's up with that?"
Again he brings up the "bloqueo," and claims that we gave them little
choice but to look for economic successes in areas that they can
control. "Although the US government has tried to stop all
exports to Cuba from every country and company, people from all over
the world want to visit us and take advantage of the many things we
have to
offer them. And our country is justifiably a great tourist destination."
Well, fair enough, I comment. But whereas tourism was once
considered demeaning to people that had to work in the tourist
industry, it's now the most desirable sector in which to work. I
point out the ridiculous
inequities that the rise of tourism has brought to Cuba. I note
that, just one day when the Atlantis rugby team was traveling from
their hotel to a practice facility, the van driver charged us 2 pesos
each to get to the practice field, and then 2 pesos each back from the
field. There were 15 of us and there was no meter in the van, and
even Iván
concedes that most of that money would not be passed through to the cab
driver's employer. Though, he says, this practice is illegal and
should be stopped.
So, let's think about that, I pursue, and though he knows what's
coming, he has to listen to me as he sips on his beer. Over the
space of 2 hours, the cabbie has taken us to and from practice, and
grossed 60 pesos. In that 2 hours - assuming he had no fares in
between, he's grossed nearly quadruple the average Cuban's
monthly salary. Suppose he receives just 100 pesos in a day, and gives
back 10% to his employer - and works 20 days a month, his gross would
be 2000 pesos, with a net of 1800 pesos. 1800 pesos is about $2250, or
more than 100 times the average Cuban's salary.
Iván challenges some of my assumptions but, whatever number he
wants to come up with, it is clear that this tourism employee, working
in a job that does not require any advanced level of education,
earns a salary that makes the huge disparity of income,
in a society that professes to be at least partially egalitarian,
impossible to dispute.
I've noticed that Cubans that support their government find this very
difficult to talk about. "It's you that distort our economy," is the
best Iván can do.
I think it's hard to dispute that, in a society that has tried to
devalue material possessions, people really really want "things." I
don't pretend to argue one moral view versus another, simply
that the disparity of income in Cuba is -- well, it's amazing and
should really be embarrassing.
I don't like to keep discussing this with Iván, who falls back
on all the good things the Cuban government has done for the poorest of
its people. And I know that illiteracy in Cuba has been
abolished, that their life expectancy is higher than ours, that
infant mortality is among the lowest in the world, that everyone
receives a free education, in fact that the government has
provided a lot of the minimal requirements of life to all its citizens.
And that this includes free health care provided by a cadre of
well-educated professionals (one of Cuba's biggest exports is medical
doctors). And I appreciate those accomplishments. But again, in a
country that professes to
share its resources equally among all its citizens - according to their
needs -, these contradictions are glaring.
Is it the embargo's fault? Well, the embargo is so powerful and
pervasive that one can, I'm sure, make the argument that the embargo
trumps all the good in Cuba,
but blaming the embargo for all the ills of the Cuban economy may turn
out to be too simplistic.
You don't think the embargo can be that powerful? Well, here are just
some minor details (Wikipedia has some concise summary articles).
The first US action took place in 1960 when we drastically reduced our
imports of sugar from Cuba. (The reduction was quickly made up by
the Soviet Union.) Then in 1963, under Kennedy and following the
Cuban Missile Crisis, we imposed travel restrictions and, using the
1917 "Trading with the Enemy Act,"
issued Cuban Assets Control Regulations. All Cuban assets in the
US were frozen and existing restrictions consolidated. This was,
however, just the tip of the iceberg.
Sanctions against Cuba were further tightened throughout the years,
particularly in 1996 with the passage of the Helms-Burton Act. Among
its many provisions, this act extended the territorial application of
the initial embargo to apply to foreign companies trading with Cuba.
That company's leadership can even be barred from entry into the United
States. This effectively means that internationally operating
companies have to choose between Cuba and the US (with the latter
clearly a much larger market). Serious stuff.
Just as an aside, and as a quote without comment, among its many other
provisions, Helms-Burton prohibits recognition of a transitional
government in Cuba that includes Fidel or Raúl Castro.
In 2008 George Bush lifted the "Trading
with
the Enemy" sanctions
against North Korea; Cuba now remains the only country in the world
sanctioned under this
act.
Here are three Wikipedia articles on these subjects:
US embargo against Cuba: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_embargo
US Trading with the Enemy Act: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trading_with_the_enemy_act
Helms-Burton:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helms-Burton_Act
"Everything is
illegal"
Samuel (and I rarely have engaged Iván and Samuel in the same
conversation because they mostly don't speak - metaphorically - the
same language) is far
more cynical than Iván; he is older and has been around for the
entire revolution. He feels that the government is not
being honest with its citizens, in fact he claims that to get anything
really
accomplished in Cuba you have to go outside the law. Just a
couple of
examples follow.
I find this hard to believe, the way I'm explaining it that is, but
it's the way I understand it. Example: although you're allowed to
own a
car, you're not allowed to buy a car. Thus a car may be a gift
from the government for a job well done, or it may be handed down as a
legacy. People do, in
fact, buy and sell cars, but the transactions are illegal and although
the original owner remains the owner of record, he and the person that
paid him for the car both know he really isn't. In order to get his car
inspected, for example, the "owner of record" must present the
car. Samuel had to go back to "5 owners ago" to get this owner
of record to accompany him for the inspection.
Likewise, the entire question of home ownership is also subject to
abuse. When the revolution succeeded, people were "grandfathered"
into the homes in which they lived. When they left the country, of
course, the homes were confiscated and the government assigned them to
people according to some government priority.
People are allowed to change houses, there is some approved protocol
for this, but there is no change of money allowed in these
"permutas." In actual fact, however, Samuel says, people aren't
stupid. If they know the house they're giving up is worth more
than the one they're moving in to, they're going to want to get some
money as part of the exchange. And this is understandable - and
this is done, but it is illegal. Señor, I'm told, just
about everything in Cuba is
illegal. And everything in Cuba is difficult. But, he
smiles, nothing is impossible.
Samuel believes that the "bottom up" democracy Iván praises is a
less democratic than it appears. "You've got to remember,
señor," he says, looking
around, "that the CDR (Committee for the Defense of the Revolution) is
everywhere. Unlike what I hear of the US, if you are not a
supporter of the revolution, you are a counter-revolutionary. If
you are a counter-revolutionary you are no better than a traitor.
And if anyone that doesn't like you in your neighborhood hears you
utter improper statements, the CDR will hear of it, and you may be put
on someone's 'shit list.' And being categorized in such a way may
hamper your future advancements in life."
"Likewise," continues Samuel, "as you've asked me about the bottom-up
nature of our democracy, anyone that is on the wrong side of the
revolution (the wrong side, that is, as the CDR thinks of it) will
never get elected at the block level. People talk; people
inform. Then once the bottom level is filled up with 'good'
revolutionaries, well what result can there be?"
The August
2006 conscription [abduction?] of Cuban males
The story I'm about to recount continues to amaze me, and I'm having
trouble finding more than a brief reference to it online, which
surprises me even more.
"Amigo," Samuel says, "our government doesn't know if it can count on
its citizens or not. You know that - and he looks around and
slides his chair closer to me - in August of 2006 my nephew Jorge was
taken from my
home, to a barracks far from here, and kept there for 3 months."
"WHAT?" I respond. (I had never heard of this.) "Yes, it
was
after Fidel gave up power, and there were rumors that the people in
Miami were dancing in the streets and waiting to attack. Jorge
was told they were there in case the Empire attacked, they would be
part of the
response. When the crisis let up, in November, he was sent
home. Of course, they never gave these young men any weapons with
which to defend the fatherland, so ... one has to wonder what they were
really thinking."
Wow! I don't know what to say. Samuel adds that he reckons more
than half of the young adult men in Havana were rounded up in this
effort.
Lack of
Internet Access
I ask him about the reason almost no Cubans have access to the Internet
- why does your government keep information from its citizens, who are,
after all, some of the best educated people in the world?
"I agree," says Samuel, "that part of the control our government feels
it
needs is maintained by the inability of our citizens to get access to
the Internet, and I also believe that access to the Internet is a
requirement to remain an educated nation."
"Nevertheless, you Americans must take a lot of the blame for the lack
of access of Cubans to the Internet: I know you don't want to hear
this, but the fact is that, because of the blockade, we have not been
able to have high-bandwidth cable laid to our country. The only
way we get access to the Internet is through two satellites that aren't
even there for us. This means there's no way we can get lots of
people online, and also that the high access charges for Internet are
necessary to keep use down to a tolerable amount."
This response surprised me, although I suppose it shouldn't have. The
embargo really does have a profound affect on Cuba. Mostly - I continue
to believe - through its attempts to strangle Cuba, it has ironically
kept the current government in power.
What is
the majority Cuban view?
So, I ask, do the majority of the people favor your government?
Samuel looks at me and says, "No one knows." He repeats, "No one
knows.
Because, if we disagree with our government, we find it difficult to
talk about these things with others, because we don't know what they're
thinking. It's a difficult dynamic."
"Well," I comment, "I've read that 95% of the people support the
government. How do they work that out?" "Well," says Samuel,
"that's
because 95% of the people participate in the elections, and anyone that
participates in elections is considered to be a revolutionary.
And," he adds, "we are expected to participate, and people know if we
participate."
"CDR?" I ask, and he
nods quietly.
How will
this end?
For one very informative session both Iván and Samuel stopped by
with friends. We were sipping on our Bucaneros, Cristals, and
Havana Club Añejo Reservas when I asked, how's all this going to
end? "It's going to end," said Yoandri, "when the US ends its
blockade. We will go on with our revolution and our peoples will become
friends." Jorge says, aware that he is in a group of people with
which he is not in complete agreement, "yes, the blockade will and must
end. But when it does, we can review what the result has been,
and proceed from there." "You must understand," says Samuel, "that
there are 192 nations in the United Nations, and nearly 190 of them
regularly vote that the embargo needs to be lifted. The last time
only the US, Israel and Palau voted against a motion to that effect."
"The people will decide," says Iván. With emphasis he
adds, "The CUBAN people will decide." Following a pause, he adds "The
Cuban people living in Cuba will decide." "Yes," says Samuel,
"the Cuban people will decide." He adds, "It must be the Cuban people
that decide." Yoandri and Jorge nod their heads in agreement.
"And do you envision Cubans and Americans being friends again?" I ask.
"Well," says Iván, "as you see here we have no problem being
friends with Americans. In fact, Cubans have always been prepared
to be friends with the United States once they understand they can't
tamper with our Revolution. Designating our country as a
supporter of terrorism, as Obama did just a couple of days ago, is
quite an irony, given the US's continued terrorism against us."
Samuel comments, "One thing on which all Cubans agree is that we are
all offended by the US's declaration that Cuba supports
terrorism. You'd never find a Cuban running around wearing a
suicide belt. We love life too much. Nor would we support those
crazies that do that." He looks reflective then adds, sadly, "We had
such high hopes for the Obama administration, but when they call us
terrorists, well - it's very depressing."
From my observations, [virtually] all Cubans living in Cuba agree on a
few things:
1. The solution to the economic ills that Cuba is suffering will be a
Cuban solution, a solution that comes from within and not from without.
2. They all ask: "End the blockade! It's been counter-productive and
it's hurt all of us."
3. It's an insult - and incorrect - to accuse us of being or supporting
terrorists!
Our
family-minded uncle
I do have one relative story from the past to recount - it was told to
me on my first post-revolution visit in 1999, and I found it very
touching at the time and still do. From the 1960s through 1980,
half our family left Cuba, mostly for Florida, but also to Puerto Rico
and Venezuela. The other half remained, some because they
couldn't get out or didn't know how, and some because they chose to
stay. One of the latter, an uncle whose descendants all remain in
Cuba, was firmly committed to the Revolution at its inception and
remained so until his death just a couple of years ago.
According to the story, confirmed by several branches of the family, to
be invited to become a member of the Communist party at the time (not
sure what the time frame of this story is, but possibly the 1960s or
1970s), was considered a great honor.
But to become a member, you had to renounce contact with any and all
relatives outside the country. No, he said, they are my family
and I will remain in contact with them... and by this action de facto
turned down the invitation.
I've been wondering over the last decade why I never went to Cuba after
the revolution until 1999. I don't remember ever thinking of it
as a possibility. On and off it was possible - my Aunt Jo and her
family visited in 1981 during a brief period in which the Reagan
administration allowed Americans to travel in order to bring medicine
and other necessities to their relatives, and my cousin Buzz and his
son Manuel traveled there in 1991 for the Pan American games (Manuel
was on the US soccer team). Mostly it was very difficult
and Cubans were, in fact, discouraged from allowing foreigners in their
houses, especially relatives. These are facts that Samuel, Iván,
and all their friends in fact, confirm they were either aware of or
that their parents told them...
How sad!
Mutual
Behavioral Issues
February
2010: A Photo. Most of the above comments were based
on my January 2010 visit; the following story, however, is based on my
February visit with a rugby team.
A number of American Interest Section (as we don't recognize the Cuban
government, we have no embassy) members turned out to
watch and cheer us on and their presence was welcome and a couple of
them chatted briefly at the tournament, in Spanish, with my Cuban
family members.
Among the many team pictures we took that weekend was one with our
Cuban opposites following our semi-final match against the Cuban
national team.
These officials were very enthusiastic about having seen us and,
according to a teammate, said they'd make sure they put up a couple of
team pictures at the Interests Section. They hoped we'd
understand,
from what I was told, if they didn't put up the one with the American
and Cuban teams together ...
Well, ... no, I don't understand...
To quote Charlie Brown, "Sigh ..."
September
2000: What the Cubans have been learning. As I wrote the
above paragraph I was reminded of an uncomfortable experience 10 years
ago. Atlantis were making their first trip to Cuba for a sevens
tournament (the first sevens tourney ever in Cuba, which we had
initiated), and everything was going well. We trained with the
Cubans, had a good time with them, etc.
We were also invited to the opening day of school by one of the Cuban
rugby players that also happened to be a school teacher. We were
on stage in a place of honor, introduced as a rugby team from New York.
We were wearing our guayaberas and guajiro hats, as a tribute to the
country we were visiting. The ceremony went on for several
minutes, but the little girl's song "Que linda es Cuba" contained an unexpected climax, seen
here.
The last words the little girl sings are "and if the Yankees want to
come here ... " The videographer, a Cuban relative of our captain
Al Caravelli, pans over to us for our reaction; Omar Rivera on the left
is a Cuban-American and knows exactly what was said. The little
girl to the left of him in the background is giggling and the parents
in the crowd responded with what sounded like nervous laughter.
Granted, this was 10 years ago, but I'm told nothing has changed.
Samuel notes, "You need to know these things, because that is what
Cuban children are taught. You should also know, however, the
people that teach that to the children would likely be the first to
jump on a plane to Miami, if they could."
I had put that in the back of my mind, but now the comments of the
American official seem more forgivable. And now on reflection it
pleasantly surprises me, given the hatred these kids grow up with, that
the Cubans can be as friendly to us as they have been.
Final
Comments
Based on what I know, from my life and from the lives of those around
me, and from what I know of the history of the past century, I don't
think Cuba's current economic system will ever be successful. But
neither I - nor, more importantly, the Cubans - will ever know this for
sure until the embargo/blockade is lifted and Cuba is allowed to
compete in the world like every other country. Until then,
charges that "el imperio" - that's us, the Empire - has caused
virtually every bad thing that ever happened in Cuba will continue to
have many adherents.
And I think both our governments are going to have to stop behaving
like petulant children.
January 2010 family trip:
1:
Background
2: January 4 -
January 6
3: January 7 - January 8
4: January 9 - January
12
February 2010 rugby trip:
1:
Background & before the team arrives (thru Mon Feb. 22)
2: the team
prepares
(Tuesday Feb 23 thru Friday Feb 26)
3:
Game Days (Saturday
& Sunday February 27 & 28)
4: after
the tourney (March
1-3)
Other trips to Havana:
1999 family trip
2000 rugby trip
(PDF only)