Marifeli Perez-Stable

Published in The Miami Herald
December 21, 2006

Fidel Castro is on the final stretch. Would he have missed the pharaonic commemoration of his 80th birthday otherwise? For almost six decades, Castro has been a fixture of Cuban politics. With the year and his life winding down, my heart and my mind are set on Cuba more than ever.

Let’s put Castro’s shadow over Cuba in perspective. In 1948, Cubans last voted in a free-and-fair presidential election. Four years later, the 50th anniversary of independence was observed, and Fulgencio Batista overthrew President Carlos Prío. In 1953, the ill-fated attack against Moncada Barracks — and Batista’s wanton repression against the young men — ushered Fidel Castro onto national prominence. The citizenry — which had resigned itself to the coup — was taken with the Moncadistas for acting against the dictator. Fidel never looked back.

Castro’s reign looms larger in Cuba’s history than absolute monarchies do in Europe’s, communism in Russia’s or Mao in China’s. Cubans have an arduous trek ahead.

Historical revisionism, which highlights bygone moments of compromise, is well under way. On both sides of the Florida Straits, not a few look askance at the effort: glorifying the intransigence of our past is stubbornly equated with patriotism. But, the time for mere intellectual debate is running out.

Unless we think — and feel — outside the box, we won’t untangle the knotted threads that bind us to the present. There are no straight lines to a democratic Cuba. The road map will be drawn in fits and starts, stumbling into dead ends while also making progress. We will need a different kind of courage, one rooted in the unbending conviction that the ends simply do not justify the means. We should ask ourselves, what would Fidel Castro do, and then find another path, never losing sight of a Cuba that has room for all of us.

Máximo Gómez — a Dominican at the forefront of Cuba’s independence wars — used to say that Cubans either fall short or overreach. Unfortunately, the old general’s insight has been more on the mark than not. Dwelling on details is tempting — for instance, the recent trip of a U.S. congressional delegation to Havana. Since Raúl Castro did not meet with the representatives, was their visit a waste of time? If so judged, then we better be prepared to entertain many more useless journeys before the back-and-forth yields concrete results. How can it be otherwise with relations so long entrenched in confrontation?

More sensitive is the issue of Havana’s violation of rights. Augusto Pinochet’s passing renewed comparisons to Fidel Castro. Well-meaning individuals on the Left scoffed at the suggestion. Yet, Castro in the 1960s had many more thousands killed than Pinochet did in the 1970s. Only the Comandante was leading a revolution, and the General crushed democracy. Both deserve a place in the human-rights hall of infamy.

The context in which each acted — Castro in a society that longed for social justice and national sovereignty, Pinochet in one that had descended into chaos — needs to be understood. Still, lofty ends pursued with brutal means are debased, no ifs, buts or maybes. When the truth comes out in a democratic Cuba, the world will acknowledge the atrocities perpetrated by a revolution which, at the time, stood tall among most Cubans and offered hope to so many elsewhere.

Last November, I traveled to Nicaragua as an electoral observer with the Organization of American States. I went with Cuba on my mind and came back wonderfully heartened. Since the 1980s, the OAS has organized dozens of electoral missions throughout the region. In Nicaragua, the OAS also worked with Enrique Bolaños’ government for 18 months to fend off a constitutional crisis. Fully appreciative of its work in Nicaragua, I look forward to the OAS doing the same in Cuba.

What most moved me were the Nicaraguans who lined up for hours to cast their ballots. My Christmas and New Year’s wish is to see similar lines everywhere in Cuba. I’m certain our day will come, but we must get it right. We’ve paid dearly for falling short or overreaching.