Marifeli Perez-Stable

Published in The Miami Herald

December 23, 2004

It’s a subject I try to avoid. But, every once in a while, something happens that drags me into yet another round of debate on how to deal with Cuba. This time it is Spain’s initiative to end the sanctions that the European Union imposed on the Cuban government after the March-April 2003 repression. EU foreign ministers will likely approve the change in January 2005.

Let’s start with what the United States and the European Union share with the Cuban people: a longing for the day when freedom and democracy reign over Cuba. Confrontation versus engagement is a sterile debate. Both imply a dialogue — interlocution is, perhaps, more accurate — though one speaks loudly, the other measuredly. Both require backdoor channels; grandstanding alone never solved a conflict.

Neither can claim success, which might be closer at hand if the United States and the EU agreed to follow confrontation or engagement in unison (pie in the sky) or combined the two in ingenious ways (uphill trek but not impossible). Neither in good conscience should take the credit when a Cuba in transition finally appears in the offing. Democracies are largely homegrown.

In June 2003, the European Union took diplomatic action against the Cuban government for having jailed 75 peaceful opponents and summarily executing three would-be hijackers. The sanctions cut back visits to Cuba by high-ranking EU officials, limited EU participation in Cuban cultural events, and — most notably — declared that dissidents would thenceforth be invited to embassy receptions. The Cuban government responded true to form: EU diplomats would not be invited to official functions, EU embassies would no longer have access to government ministries and Cuban officials were forbidden from setting foot in EU missions.

Castro, of course, relishes confrontation and thrives on shouting matches. Having survived the U.S. onslaught for decades, why should he buckle to the European Union? That the European Union is Cuba’s foremost investor and trading partner is nothing next to upholding national “dignity and sovereignty.”

In his infinite cynicism, the dictator likely saw the ”benefit” of the 75 in jail as cards to be put on the table down the line.

At their January meeting, EU foreign ministers will probably reverse the sanctions and revert to the status quo ante, which conditioned EU-Cuban relations to progress on human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cuba. Dissidents would no longer be invited to embassy receptions but neither would government officials. The European Union, moreover, would seek an ongoing dialogue with the oposition and intensify contacts with civil society.

During 18 months, EU diplomats twiddled their thumbs in Havana. What good is having diplomatic missions if contacts with the host government and society are trimmed to the bare minimum?

Pragmatism — not, as critics have alleged, Socialist Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero’s born-again reflex to coddle an aged dictator — drove Spain’s initiative which found receptive ears in almost all EU members. No one in the European Union is under any illusions that Cuba will make meaningful progress toward democracy while Castro is alive. Still, the EU way — which merits due consideration — is to engage whenever possible.

Castro’s clock is ticking closer to midnight. When it stops, the bet on engagement may pay off. Having maintained an interlocution with Cuban government officials, the opposition and civil society, the European Union may have a leg up on Cuba’s future. Then, too, the United States might gauge the true costs of confrontation as it tries to make up for bridges not tended during the dictator’s twilight years.

”You can always rely on America to do the right thing once it has exhausted the alternatives,” Winston Churchill confidently said. Robert Pastor — a long-time advisor to former President Jimmy Carter — once made an imaginative proposal: In exchange for an end to the embargo, the European Union and Latin America would join the United States in an energetic, resourceful campaign to put the spotlight on Cuba’s dismal record on human rights. No one in the U.S. government has taken or will likely take Pastor’s proposal seriously.

Too bad. It’d be a shame to prove Churchill wrong.