|
|
|
Please, click on the buttons located over the photos of the authors to open their articles. If you desire to read only their latest articles, click on the titles that appear below their photos.
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 28, 1853 - May 19, 1895 |
July 4, 1845 - December 7, 1896 |
||
|
BECOMING CUBA Michael Rowan |
ROGER NORIEGA: IT WAS A WISE
DECISION TO EXPEL LIVIA ACOSTA
FROM THE US Alicia de la Rosa |
|
LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA {01-26-2012} BECOMING CUBA MICHAEL ROWAN // EL UNIVERSAL THE WORST FRAUD IN HISTORY IS CUBA, WHICH IS BEING REPEATED IN VENEZUELA. The suppression of freedom in Cuba was a horrible crime against humanity, but it was not unique. Unfortunately, the 20th century was littered with similar crimes perpetrated by Nazis from the right and Communists from the left, among others. Yet what's different about Cuba is how its destruction of freedom for millions of people was celebrated by credible outside observers as if it was a great achievement for humanity. This is by far the worst fraud in modern history. The perpetrators of that fraud range all the way from European intellectuals to Hollywood to the New York Times. And the fraud continues to this day. Imagine if what happened in Cuba were prepared in the abstract for objective analysis: no civilized observer in the world would credit what happened in Cuba as a human achievement. Yet Che Guevara and Fidel Castro became American idols, glorified in movies and news as quintessential rebels, and still are. No rational assembly of facts appears able to sustain the heady oxygen depletion of climbing to the top of the mountain created by this fraud, which stands as the Himalaya of political ignorance in our time. And nowhere has the fraud planted roots as deep as in Venezuela. It inspired the coup attempts of 1992, the election of a rebel in 1998, and the destruction of freedom that has happened since. But there are two versions of what has happened since. One version deals with facts and the other deals with an illusion. As in Cuba, the Venezuelan illusion has more power and money behind it than the bothersome facts. This is especially the case for world observers who look at Venezuela through the same rose-colored lenses used to view Cuba. Chávez, while not as smart as Fidel or as charismatic as Che, basks in the same fraudulent light. The fraud is so imbedded in Venezuela that it has the power of law and all the oil money in the country behind it. To doubt the illusion or to depend on the facts is a very dangerous game in Venezuela, which as we all know, is perfect. |
WASHINGTON, D.C. {01-25-2011} ROGER NORIEGA: IT WAS A WISE DECISION TO EXPEL LIVIA ACOSTA FROM THE US ALICIA DE LA ROSA // EL UNIVERSAL ROGER NORIEGA, FORMER US AMBASSADOR TO THE ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES (OAS), referred to the situation involving the Venezuelan consul to Miami Livia Acosta, and said that the US State Department had "no choice but to expel" the diplomatic in the face of evidence showing intent "to harm" the national security. "They (State Department) had no other choice, because the evidence, the video images of Livia Acosta talking to some people about launching attacks on government websites around the United States, show a willingness to harm national security, which is totally unacceptable for a diplomat," Noriega said on Tuesday in a radio interview in Miami. He added the US government has information that Acosta is an agent of the Bolivarian National Intelligence Service (Sebin), which is "the intelligence branch of President Hugo Chávez, and it is unacceptable to have such people because they pose a threat to the country and runs counter to the interests of Venezuelans living in the US." Noriega, who was the Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs during the administration of George W. Bush, hoped that Miami Congressmen will go ahead with their investigation into Venezuelan diplomats who are allegedly intelligence agents. "We must recognize that for a decade, Chávez has launched an asymmetric war against the security interests of the United States, and along with Cuba, Russia and Iran, he has the tools to harm our security and threaten our people," Noriega said. He added that "for the first time" President Barack Obama has talked about the presence of Iran and has "committed" to monitor the activities of that country in the hemisphere. |
 Iran-Latin America links drawing attention in Washington Andres Oppenheimer |
|
MIAMI, FLORIDA {02-05-2012} Iran-Latin America links drawing attention in Washington Andres Oppenheimer Latin America rarely comes up as a major issue in U.S. presidential races, but this time it will: There are growing signs that Iran’s rising presence in the region will become a contentious election topic. Republican hopeful Mitt Romney and leading Republicans in Congress are stepping up their attacks on President Barack Obama for allegedly not doing enough to stop what they see as Iran’s intention to use Latin America as a launching pad for terrorist attacks against the United States. The issue is drawing growing attention in Washington. On Thursday , as Iran launched its own region-wide Spanish-language TV network in Latin America — a follow-up to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s fifth visit to the region in as many years — the Republican-controlled House Foreign Affairs Committee held hearings about “Iran’s agenda in the Western Hemisphere.” The hearings came hours after U.S. National Intelligence chief James Clapper stated that Iranian officials “are now willing to conduct an attack in the United States.” Clapper did not explicitly suggest that such attacks would come from Latin America, but Republican congressional leaders did. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ileana Ros Lehtinen, R-Miami, said in her opening statement that Iran’s alliance with Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and Ecuador “can pose an immediate threat by giving Iran a platform in the region to carry out attacks against the United States, our interests and allies.” Recalling last year’s U.S. government disclosure of a plot by Iran’s Quds Force to kill the Saudi ambassador on U.S. soil, and a reported 2007 scheme by an Iranian diplomat in Mexico to launch a cyber-attack against the United States, Ros Lehtinen added that “the fact that the military arm of a state-sponsor of terrorism has its operatives in multiple countries in our hemisphere is certainly cause for alarm.” In his testimony to the committee, University of Miami researcher Jose Azel warned of a nightmare scenario in which Iran could place nuclear weapons aimed toward U.S. territory in Venezuela — much like the Soviet Union began to build nuclear bases in Cuba during the 1962 missile crisis . Norman A. Bailey, a Reagan administration official, said Venezuela is helping Iran circumvent international financial sanctions through the use of the Venezuelan financial system. In addition, hard-liners stress that Iran-backed terrorist groups such as Hezbollah are likely to use friendly countries in Latin America as bases from which to prepare terrorist attacks elsewhere in the region. Argentina has charged that Hezbollah, with Iran’s assistance, carried out the deadly bombings against the Israeli Embassy and a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1992 and 1994. Romney has lashed out against Obama for allegedly failing to respond to Ahmadinejad’s ties to Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, and in a Nov. 22 Republican debate, he warned that Hezbollah’s activities “throughout Latin America” pose “a very significant and imminent threat” to the United States. The Obama administration says Iran is a latent threat in Latin America, rather than a clear and present danger, and that it is watching Iran’s activities in the region closely. U.S. officials also warn against a U.S. over-reaction to unconfirmed reports about Iran’s activities there. Remember the weapons of mass destruction fiasco that led to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, officials say privately. Furthermore, a senior State Department official told me that Ahmadinejad is increasingly weak at home and isolated internationally and may be exaggerating the importance of his ties with Latin America “out of desperation” to show his people at home that he has not become an international pariah. My opinion: It would be much better if Latin America came up in presidential debates in the context of a positive agenda, with proposals by the candidates to create a Trans-American Partnership, much like the ambitious Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade plan that Obama recently proposed for Pacific Rim countries. But I'm afraid that, even without an escalation of the Iran conflict - such as if Israel were to launch a preventive attack against Iran's nuclear facilities, and Iran retaliated by striking against Israeli civilian targets in Latin America, like it did in Argentina two decades ago - the Iran-Latin America connection will overshadow a much-needed discussion on enhancing U.S. economic ties with Latin America. |
 U.S.
Intelligence Chief doubts
Venezuelan dictator Hugo
Chavez is cured of cancer |
|
Washington, d.c. {02-02-2012} U.S. intelligence chief doubts VENEZUELAN DICTATOR HUGO Chávez is cured of cancer Roger Noriega U.S. intelligence chief James Clapper on Tuesday publicly contradicted claims by Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chávez that he is cured of cancer, the first official U.S. statement on Chávez’s failing health. General Clapper’s declarations, made during testimony before the U.S. Senate, breaks months of silence from the U.S. government on the subject of Chávez’s health and corroborates my assertions that Chávez is deceiving the Venezuelan people about his fatal condition. I wrote in the Miami Herald on July 19, 2011, that doctors treating Chávez told him then that he had a 50 percent chance of living 18 months. That was seven months ago. I noted that: With the ailing dictator off the political stage for at least two months, civic leaders can jump start a transition by laying out a constructive plan for addressing the country’s growing crises. This task is even more urgent, because regime insiders have begun to quietly mobilize their campaign team… Since then, dozens of my sources with access to Chávez’s inner circle have confirmed my original appraisal about Chávez’s condition. Several publications have revealed additional details about his health. For example, Spain’s ABC newspaper reported on January 23: The Venezuelan leader’s prostate cancer has metastasized into his bones, spinal cord, and colon, according to medical records accessed by ABC. Chávez should only expect between nine and twelve months of life if he insists on refusing adequate treatment for his cancer… General Clapper revealed the U.S. government’s devastating assessment of Chávez’s health as part of the U.S. intelligence community’s formal annual report to Congress; he is scheduled to testify before the House of Representatives oversight panel on Thursday. As I explained last November: Chávez’s sobering prognosis is a dilemma for Caracas, where Chavista leaders are afraid that their fiercest followers will feel betrayed when they learn his claim to be”cancer-free” turns out to be a big lie…. Chávez wants his people to believe that he was “cured” months ago…. In fact, his physical deterioration is advancing faster than doctors had expected. Chávez’s periodic public appearances—particularly his nine-hour address before the National Assembly earlier this month—are purposely orchestrated to sow doubts about his true condition and buy time for his co-conspirators to hang on to power as he falters and dies. Ironically, these public encounters are grueling physical challenges for Chávez, and doctors have told him that such public commitments complicate his treatment and recovery. Many Venezuelans—perhaps most of Chávez’s supporters—have clung to the hope that he might be surviving his bout with his aggressive cancer. The formal testimony of retired U.S. Air Force Lieutenant General James Clapper, the current U.S. director of national intelligence, reveals what intelligence professionals tell President Obama about Chávez’s failing health. |
 Cuba and the Castro news filter |
|
Washington, d.c. {02-01-2012} Cuba and the Castro News Filter MARY ANASTASIA O'GRADY Investment companies that provide market analysis are required by law to disclose potential conflicts of interest that could bias their reports. Imagine if media outlets were forced to do the same with stories filed from inside Cuba's military dictatorship. Their disclaimers might read like this: "This report was prepared under psychological duress, threat of loss of journalistic credentials, imprisonment or expulsion from the country, and while being spied on 24-7." Tourism, aka "cultural exchanges," out of the U.S. to the island is on the rise, leading some observers to conclude that the dictatorship is kinder and gentler than it used to be. But all visitors, and those they interact with in Cuba, are as carefully watched as they were in the first days of the revolution. In the news business, reporters are not permitted to travel freely, and it is verboten to damage the image of the Castro government. Penalties can be severe. This reality came to mind last week when we learned of the death of another dissident at the hands of the regime. Thirty-one-year-old Wilman Villar Mendoza, who was arrested in November, had been on a hunger strike for at least 50 days. His imprisonment was part of a wider wave of state repression that has been under way for more than a year amid a rising number of public protests, particularly by young people. Yet while Raúl Castro's announcements about "reform" have made headlines and topped television news around the globe, we had hardly heard of Villar Mendoza or the resistance movement he belonged to. Apologists for the status quo will tell you that Cuba's democracy movement is not news because the number of Cubans who would rebel given the right encouragement is insignificant. But if Cuba is an island of contentment, why do the Castro brothers go to such lengths to make an example of dissidents like Villar Mendoza and pressure local news bureaus to ignore the repression? There is a reason journalists who want to stick around know they'd better find something else to write about. Villar Mendoza's case was especially hard to learn about because he lived in the eastern province of Santiago de Cuba. The east is one of the most repressed areas of the county, perhaps because it is where, historically, uprisings in Cuba have originated. Now, despite the tight grip, it is again becoming the hotbed of antigovernment protests, united by a coalition known as the Eastern Democratic Alliance. But since there are no embassies there and reporters may not leave Havana without permission, the magnitude of the eastern rebellion is not recognized by the outside world. The story has gotten out thanks to Cuba's independent journalists and human-rights advocates, operating on a shoestring and at great personal risk. They use cellphones and sometimes computers when they can sneak under the radar. They've reported that on Nov. 14 Villar Mendoza was beaten and arrested for his part in a peaceful protest march in his hometown of Contramaestre. Ten days later, in a summary trial, he was sentenced to four years in prison. When he was refused an appeal, again without due process, he began a hunger strike. His jailers at Aguadores prison responded by stripping him, throwing him in a dank solitary confinement cell, and denying him water. He came down with pneumonia and died of sepsis. Given the history, the account sounds plausible and gains credibility from the regime's intensive damage-control efforts. The Castros allege that Villar Mendoza was a common criminal. This is standard procedure: In fact the regime claims there are no "political" prisoners in Cuban jails—only criminals. Former Cuba correspondent for Spanish Television, Vicente Botín, describes how hard it is to report the truth from the island in his 2009 book "Funerales de Castro." He reminds readers that in 1997 Fidel expelled a French journalist for writing that Cuban chickens were not meeting their government egg-laying quotas. In 2007, the regime withdrew the credentials of three foreign correspondents from the Chicago Tribune, the BBC and the Mexican daily El Universal for lack of "objectivity." "The three journalists were scapegoats used to warn their colleagues in the foreign press of the dangers they run if their 'objectivity' does not coincide with that of the government," Mr. Botín notes. Sebastián Martínez Ferraté didn't fare so well. In 2008 he used a hidden camera to document Cuba's epidemic of childhood prostitution, and the report aired in Spain. When he returned to the island in 2010, he was arrested and sentenced to 17 years in prison. Spain only recently negotiated his release. As Mr. Botín explains, the regime goes out of its way to make sure that journalists know that they are being watched and no one working in Cuba is under any illusion about a free press. Yet when foreigners watch "news" from the island they are likely, through force of habit, to put their trust in the messenger. Maybe the news organizations should start running that disclaimer. |
 Humanitarians with a guillotine Jose Azel |
MIAMI, FLORIDA {02-02-2012} Humanitarians with a Guillotine José Azel* In the study of government transitions, particularly those that took place in Eastern and Central Europe following the collapse of the Soviet Union, a pivotal argument about the sequencing of reforms took the form of a “chicken or the egg” causality dilemma: What should come first, political or economic changes? Since, in most countries economic prosperity is found together with personal freedoms, some postulate that economic reforms cause the advent of political freedoms. However, the fact that two events are frequently observed together does not mean that one causes the other. Logicians often offer a quotidian example to illustrate the reasoning error: We press the button to call the elevator, wait impatiently, and then press it again. The elevator arrives and we incorrectly deduce that the second button push is what caused the elevator to come. In logic, the principle that correlation does not imply causation is known as the “cum hoc ergo propter hoc” fallacy, (Latin for “with this, therefore because of this”). The error of this argument can be readily shown by examining the experiences of China and Vietnam. China began profound market-based economic reforms in 1978 and Vietnam shortly after. Today, both of these countries are significantly wealthier, but after three decades of economic progress, political reforms have not followed. China and Vietnam remain totalitarian states and classified as “Not Free” in the yearly Freedom House ranking. What the experiences of China and Vietnam demonstrate is the virtue of free market reforms and capitalism as engines for economic progress. The experiences of these countries cannot be logically offered as a path to personal freedoms and citizenry empowerment. Note, for example, that China’s new wealthy business class is increasingly seeking to live abroad to be able to enjoy a freedom as basic as having a second child. This would be a pedantic discussion except that the reasoning fallacy leads many, motivated by high ideals, to embrace coercive polices on humanitarian grounds. Isabel Paterson in her classic 1943 book, The God of the Machine, labels this syndrome “The Humanitarian with the Guillotine.” In the Cuba policy debate, the humanitarians with the guillotine endorse minuscule and coercive changes by that totalitarian regime as meaningful. For example the Cuban government recently announced, with considerable fanfare, that the number of permitted self-employment activities would be increased from 178 to 181. Now, in addition to being able to baby-sit and shine shoes, Cubans will be allowed to do tile work and become party planners. Humanitarians applaud this humiliating doling out of subsistence. The most recent reform captures the headlines as “Cuba will allow the purchase and sale of properties.” The reality is much more pernicious. The sales will be on a cash basis only since there is no mortgage banking system. Cubans do not have discretionary capital for such transactions and thus the transactions are likely to be financed with remittances from the Cuban diaspora; hard currency transfers that will strengthen the regime. In principle, humanitarians, and all freedom loving peoples, would agree that policies that tend to prolong the existence of totalitarian regimes should not be supported. In practice, misled by the “with this, therefore because of this” fallacy, they end up doing just that. In doing so they release the guillotine’s blade that decapitates the hope for political freedoms. There is a great deal of pain and distress incidental to existence, and the desire to do good for others can lead us to accept change without political freedoms and enforced by compulsion. But, the relief for this existential distress lies, not only in improving material well-being, but in obtaining the personal freedoms that give meaning to human existence. In the political realm these freedoms are expressed in open debate and via free, fair, and frequent elections that allow a citizenry to change its leadership. These are conditions that do not exist in China, Vietnam, or Cuba and are not likely to follow economic liberalization. Good governance and our pursuit of happiness require political pluralism and an engaged citizenry empowered to change its leaders, as is vividly expressed by the old adage: Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason. *José Azel is a Senior Research Associate at the Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies, University of Miami. He is the author of the recently published book, Mańana in Cuba. |
 "Runrunes" Nelson Bocaranda Sardi |
VENEZUELA, CARACAS {02-03-2012} RUNRUNES (RUMORE) NELSON BOCARANDA SARDI // EL UNIVERSAL Intermediate
DOUBLE RED LANGUAGE. The government decision to denounce a
treaty whereby investments are secured and any disputes that
may arise between the Government of Venezuela and investors
are brought to arbitration, is not based on preservation of
Venezuela's sovereignty but intended to prevent any
judgments on the 23 ongoing lawsuits at the Icsid
(International Center for Settlement of Investment
Disputes). The red, very-red purpose cannot be attained
because ongoing trials will keep on going and any ruling
will be enforceable. Denunciation of the treaty will be
effective only six months after the notice to the United
Nations. |
 Drill, Castro, drill--Obama and environmental friends help... Humberto Fontova |
WASHINGTON, D.C. {02-01-2012} DRILL, CASTRO, DRILL--OBAMA AND ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDS HELP CUBA TAP OIL OFF FLORIDA HUMBERTO FONTOVA IN HALF A HEARTBEAT, THE OBAMA TEAM COULD PUT THE KIBOSH ON THE MOST DANGEROUS OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING EVER PROPOSED NEAR U.S. SHORES, scheduled to begin in December. By fighting this drilling operation, President Obama’s environmentalist allies could get the biggest bang for their lobbying buck in their history. But all bets are off. This drilling, you see, won’t be done by villainous U.S. oil companies. Instead, a Spanish-Cuban oil company will be drilling in Cuban waters 60 miles from Key West. U.S. companies are banned from exploring anywhere within 125 miles of the Florida coast. But none of the usual histrionics and fist-shaking from environmentalist quarters against “rapists of Mother Earth,” “despoilers of our coasts and oceans” and “obscene profiteers” have manifested against Fidel Castro’s business partners - none whatsoever. Instead, as a contingency against any drilling mishaps, the above parties already have found a way to blame - you guessed it - Republicans. More specifically, fault already has been affixed to the most lopsidedly Republican voters in U.S. history, Americans of Cuban heritage, who supposedly single-handedly maintain the embargo against Cuba and thus would prevent any cooperation with Cubans in case of a spill. “We’re shooting ourselves in the foot by not working together,” groused Environmental Defense Fund attorney Dan Whittle after returning absolutely enchanted from a recent meeting with members of Cuba’s Stalinist nomenklatura. “They’re taking the lessons of the BP spill very seriously. They could have easily distanced themselves from what happened and said theirs is a different situation from BP and said ‘thanks very much.’ The very opposite happened.” Why, those fine folks down in Cuba just couldn’t have been more kind, helpful and accommodating. Us blockheaded Yankee bullies? Hopeless. A team headed by the chairman of Mr. Obama’s BP spill task force, William Reilly, and Mr. Whittle just visited Cuba to assist that country with its drilling plans. But when the George W. Bush administration planned to open areas off Florida to U.S. oil companies, this same Environmental Defense Fund went ballistic: “Offshore drilling poses an unacceptable level of risk to two of Florida’s most important economic sectors. Opening a new 1.5 million acre swath of the Eastern Gulf to oil drilling unnecessarily threatens marine life with pollution and puts Florida beaches at a much greater risk for spills. Given the environmental risks … this seems like an ill-considered move by the Bush administration. Opening more of the Gulf to drilling now makes little environmental, economic or political sense.” The drilling rig on its way to a site 60 miles from Florida’s coast is Chinese-built, Italian-owned and Spanish-leased. Its purpose is to enrich Cuba’s Stalinist nomenklatura, enabling them to better sponsor terrorism and torture people. If only the Obama-environmental alliance team could muster the same contempt for this alliance that it has for Texans. Texas-based Seahawk Drilling, for instance, among the biggest drillers in the Gulf, filed for bankruptcy in February. The company was battered and finally killed off by “the slowdown in the issuing of shallow-water [drilling] permits in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico following the Macondo well blowout,” read its press release. Louisiana’s Democratic Sen. Mary L. Landrieu blamed “the administration’s excruciatingly slow release of oil and gas permits. … How many more rigs have to leave and how many more businesses have to close before it realizes the havoc the de facto moratorium is [wreaking] on the Gulf Coast?” The Energy Information Agency thinks more than 59 billion barrels of recoverable oil reside in U.S. offshore waters. But given environmental legislation, U.S. drillers are forbidden from going anywhere near this treasure trove. As it happens, the Spanish-based oil company Repsol, which partners with the Castro regime, holds leases on U.S. territory. U.S. laws enforcing the embargo of Cuba call for penalties against such accessories to theft but have been meticulously and relentlessly overlooked. To wit: In July 1960, Castro’s KGB-trained security forces stormed into 5,911 U.S.-owned businesses in Cuba and stole them all at Soviet gunpoint - a $2 billion heist from outraged U.S. business owners and stockholders. Not all Americans surrendered their legal and hard-earned property peacefully. Among some who resisted were Bobby Fuller, whose family farm would become a Soviet-style collective, and Howard Anderson, whose profitable Jeep dealership was coveted by Castro’s henchmen. Both U.S. citizens were murdered by Castro and Che Guevara’s firing squads. Many of the Canadian, European and Chinese companies partnering with Castro occupy and operate those stolen properties and assets.For the most part, these foreign corporations blow their noses on U.S. laws. But last week a letter drafted by the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, signed by a bipartisan group of 34 House members and addressed to Repsol’s president, hints at the tight grip Americans hold on the Spanish corporation - and could tighten on a whim: “Dear Mr. Antonio Brufau Niubo: “Repsol’s partnership with the Cuban regime could violate U.S. law, and may run afoul of pending legislation in the U.S. Congress. … As to current law, Repsol may be in jeopardy of subjecting itself and its affiliates to criminal and civil liability in U.S. courts. Violations of the Trading with the Enemy Act, the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, the Alien Tort Claims Act, and the Trade Sanctions Reform and Enforcement Act can lead to serious ramifications for individuals or businesses that deal with the Cuban regime.” It’s a long shot, but there’s a chance the Obama team will see fit to bring the hammer down on a state sponsor of terrorism that helped the Soviets threaten us with nuclear weapons, stole billions from U.S. citizens and most seriously threatens Florida’s beaches. That would be a refreshing change from the team’s practice of acting against domestic oil companies that fuel our economy and employ millions of our fellow citizens. |
 "Chavez's cancer keeps the Castro brothers awake" |
Miami, Florida {01-31-2012} “Chávez’s cancer keeps the Castro brothers awake” Interview by ROBERTO GIUSTI // EL UNIVERSAL He was imprisoned when he was 17 years old. He is somewhat attached to Venezuela, as he fled for the Venezuelan Embassy from jail in 1961. Carlos Alberto Montaner has been in exile for almost half a century without losing his composure. He is the author of 25 books, a columnist, university professor, political activist and confessed liberal. He thinks that, besides the extreme need of the Cuban regime for the Venezuelan aid, there is an affective component in Fidel Castro in his endeavor to rescue what he views as his only, real heir. You have always postulated Cuba-Venezuela Federation. Is it not a mistake, considering that while in Venezuela there is an attempt at imposing "transition to socialism," as top government officers say, in Cuba, to the contrary, there is transition to capitalism? Actually, those obsessed with the merger were Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez. It seems to me a ludicrous aim. Ending 2005, Carlos Lage, then Vice-President of the State Council, and Felipe Pérez Roque, the Cuban Minister of Foreign Affairs, publicly backed such union between Caracas and Havana. Sure enough, they were following Fidel’s orders. At that time, President Hugo Chávez gave his blessing. It looked like a short-term operation and they even appointed some committees to study a juridical integration of both countries. However, everything came to a halt. Why did it stop? Because the reaction in Cuba was terrible. When Lage said that Cuba had two presidents, Fidel and Castro, such a remark fell down like a bomb on the island. Cuban military men are not so much respectful of Chávez, and the government has cultivated fierce nationalism for decades. That was kind of an act of treason. Further, Fidel got sick in the summer of 2006 and Raúl does not believe in such fabrications. In this way, the project was put on ice. Fidel Castro smartly handled the issue of his disease and succession. To what extent is he doing likewise with Chávez’s cancer? Chávez’s cancer has been terrible news for Fidel Castro. Now, Havana tries to control a Venezuela, where Chávez could die. Such a scenario keeps them awake. The primary task of Cuban services, which are very clever for that matter, and their best strategists, in the event of Chávez passing away, is preventing that endless source of available wealth from slipping away. Why Chávez did not go to Brazil, as it was announced? The Castros would not let the patient go to Brazil. They convinced him that nowhere would he be taken care of as good as in Cuba. Controlling Chávez at this time and trying to keep him alive increases the chance of grasping Venezuela’s future. Do you think that Venezuelans and the world have not realized that Chávez has handed over most of his powers and this could cause a power vacuum able to unleash a full-scale political crisis? They should know it. The foreseeable thing is that, if the caudillo dies, in the short or medium term, he will take his government to the grave. In Venezuela, there are neither institutions nor a true ruling party. There is just a charismatic leader who will hardly transfer the power to a successor. How can the issue of succession be solved in a country where everything revolves around Chávez? Either sick or off duty, is political change by electoral means not ensured? Raúl Castro is a grayish man who does not need votes. Adán Chávez has not charisma at all and does need votes. Can be leadership be transferred in the Venezuelan case? It is very difficult. For that reason, Adán Chávez said that election is not the only means of doing revolution. He is preparing in the event of taking office forcefully. In the absence of Hugo, the government elite will probably espouse Adán to keep its political project and privileges. Hardly possible though, is for them to admit electoral defeat and go home. What do you reckon the fact that Chávez took the word "death" out -getting rid of the red color- and criticized sectarianism? It seems that Chávez is very frightened. His relationship with Fidel and the protection sought in Havana attest to it. It is likely that being close to death made him revise everything. When people approach death, they usually change their priorities and cool their passions down. That Chávez who was taking the communion was not cheating Venezuelans -he was scared.
|
|
“General Giap was a brilliant leader of the North
Vietnamese Army.
