CUBAN FUTUROLOGY

By Leonardo Padura and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

HAVANA, Nov 12 2007 (IPS) - The recent hardening of Bush\’s policy towards Cuba comes at a time when there are discussions underway on the island of what might accurately be called a possible transition: the search for structural and conceptual changes that Raul Castro himself demanded in an exhortation that spurred a population reticent about expressing its opinions to reject obsolete policies and propose possible changes, writes Leonardo Padura Fuentes, a Cuban writer and journalist whose novels have been translated into a ten languages. In this article, the author asks whether the government of Cuba, in an atmosphere of belligerence from the US and serious economic problems at home, has the possibility (and the will) to make these changes and how far it will go with them if the conservative forces opt for immobility. In a country where for decades no solution has been found to shortages and the lack of housing, where the leaders have recognised that interest in work has fallen in direct proportion to the impossibility of meeting daily needs with one\’s salary, and where there has been for years ethical deterioration, corruption, prostitution, etc, the introduction of \’\’structural and conceptual\’\’ changes is clearly advisable if not already indispensable.

The persistence of this question is a clear indication that Cuba and its destiny are a problem that worries those beyond the island as well (and, of course, people are interested in more than just its poor writers). But the questioners have good reason for their persistence: between domestic uncertainty and threats from abroad, the majority of those interested see Cuba’s destiny as a dark cloud in which you can just barely make out a few silhouettes.

However, even granting that my doubts outweigh my certainties, I think that the year that begins this November and that in many senses will end with the American presidential elections of November 2008 might be, for a number of reasons, decisive for the future of Cuba.

As is well known, the Cuban ”problem” has an undeniable value in the American vote market. Thus, availing himself of the proverbial opportunity to be inopportune, just days before the UN General Assembly wias approved by a great majority of countries a Cuban draft resolution calling for an end to the embargo (or blockade), President Bush outlined his final policy towards the island, proposing to reinforce not only the embargo but even the encouragement of domestic subversion, and promising his country’s assistance to the island once it begins its democratic post-communist period.

Bush’s proposals are neither new nor surprising; they are typical of the traumatic relationship between Cuba and the US which, since the 19th century, has been twisted by the imperial arrogance of Washington’s policy towards the island, and which in the last 50 years has reached startling levels of irrationality and determination. How is it possible that Washington has normal relations with China, and even Vietnam, but refuses to soften its stance towards Cuba?

The belligerent talk of the US president has had an immediate effect — as it always does: Havana’s logical hardening of its position in response to concrete threats. If just a few months ago –last July– the acting president Raul Castro signalled to Washington a potential openness to come to an understanding on an equal basis, Bush’s last move destroyed any such possibility and returned the countries to their permanent Cold War footing. Cubans on both sides of the Florida strait are now setting their sights on next November’s elections, after which a new US president will chose one of two paths: maintaining the current mode of hostility, or beginning a thaw, which many Cubans and Americans have been hoping for for many years.

The hardening of Bush’s policy towards Cuba comes at a time when there are in fact discussions underway on the island of what might accurately be called a possible transition: the search for structural and conceptual changes that Raul Castro himself demanded in an exhortation that spurred a population reticent about expressing its opinions to reject obsolete policies and propose possible changes directed at that which affects them most: daily life.

Although the government insists that the option of Cuban socialism is eternal and therefore irreversible, a sizeable part of the population is asking for a profound shakeup even in the sectors most publicised by the government, like public health and education, which are plagued by problems ranging from a shortage of qualified personnel to corruption. They are demanding more flexible economic policies –characterised by some as more realistic– and even changes to the decision-making system.

Such changes, which Cubans trust would improve their living conditions –realistic salaries, more housing, a revitalisation of economic models, freedom to travel — are a clear indication of a lack of support for various structures that have been frozen by orthodoxy, bureaucratisation, and volunteerism.

An important question is whether the government of Cuba, in an atmosphere of belligerence from the US and serious economic problems at home, has the possibility (and the will) to make these changes and how far it will go with them if the conservative forces, which always exist, opt for immobility, even if this would mean going against public opinion, which is increasingly hungry for change, and against the demands of reality itself.

In a country for decades unable to find a solution to shortages and the lack of housing, where the leaders have recognised that interest in work has fallen in direct proportion to the impossibility of meeting daily needs with one’s salary, where the modes of production in sectors like agriculture have been shown to be inefficient, where the circulation of two currencies — the Cuban pesos and dollars — has generated disparities in the people’s possibilities depending on who has access to the latter, and where there has been for years ethical deterioration, corruption, prostitution, etc — and growing signs of a lack of social discipline and street violence, the introduction of ”structural and conceptual” changes is clearly advisable if not already indispensable.

It seems that the future of Cuba that is of such interest to the journalists interviewing writers is being decided in these very moments. The future is in the present, and it is being played out on and off the island. The necessity of change –without threats and interference– in many sectors of the life of the country will determine that future, which could also involve political change. Immobility on one side and imperial aggression on the other can only result in consequences like the deepening of problems until they become asphyxiating or until the future becomes only an imitation of the present. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)