A Historical Roadmap for Liberating the Cuban Five

Gesture For Gesture

By JOSÉ PERTIERRA

Recent declarations by President Raúl Castro reveal a willingness to engage the United States in negotiations that, if successful, could mean the return of the Cuban Five. Responding to reporters´ questions last December, Raúl revealed a willingness to free some prisoners currently held in Cuba in response to a gesture from the United States to free the Cuban Five. Gesto a gesto, he called it: gesture for gesture.1
Gibbon said that the only way to judge the future is by the past. And history gives us the lantern that illuminates a possible political solution to one of the thorniest issues that still mars relations between the United States and Cuba: prisoners.
HISTORICAL PRECEDENT
There is historical precedent for a mutual release of prisoners on the basis of unilateral, but reciprocated, gestures. It is little known, but thanks to US government-declassified documents, we can now learn about the delicate negotiations that led to a mutual release of important prisoners thirty years ago.
In September of 1979, the United States unilaterally released four Puerto Rican nationalists, and ten days later Cuba reciprocated by releasing four United States citizens who were in prison in Cuba.2
It is curious to note that the phrase gesto-a-gesto that Raúl is now using to urge the release of the Cuban Five is the same one that his brother, Fidel, used in 1978, when he told US diplomats Robert Pastor and Peter Tarnoff,
I do not understand why you are so tough on the Puerto Ricans. The U.S. could make a gesture and release them, and then we would make another gesture—without any linkage—just a unilateral humanitarian gesture.3
US government documents confirm that discussions between the U.S. and Cuban governments occurred during 1978 and 1979 regarding an exchange of prisoners. National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski said in a letter in 1979 to the Justice Department:
Castro and his representatives have said publicly and told us privately that, if we release the four Puerto Ricans, they will, after an appropriate interval, release the four United States citizens imprisoned in Cuba. . . . . while we should not accept nor even consider an exchange, the fact that a positive decision by the U.S. is likely to lead to a positive decision by Cuba to release U.S. citizens is a welcome prospect. 4
THE PRISONERS WHO WERE FREED
At the time of their release in 1979, the Puerto Ricans, Lolita Lebrón, Rafael Cancel Miranda, Irving Flores Rodríguez, and Oscar Collazo, had been in prison in the United States for over 24 years. The Americans who Cuba released ten days later, Lawrence Lunt, Juan Tur, Everett Jackson, and Claudio Rodriguez—had spent more than 10 years in Cuban prisons.
THE BRZEZINSKI AND PASTOR MEMOS
One of the most interesting of the declassified documents is a memorandum written by National Security Adviser, Zbigniew Brzezinski, in early 1979 to John R. Standish, Department of Justice Pardon Attorney. In the memo, Brzezinski recommends that the US government commute the sentences of the four Puerto Ricans.
The Obama Administration could well learn from the Brzezinski memo the benefits of a gesture-for-gesture negotiation that, if used now, could reap diplomatic benefits for both countries. In his memo to the Department of Justice, Brzenzinski pointed out that the continued imprisonment of the Puerto Ricans lends fuel to critics of US policy, and that commuting their sentences would be welcomed as a compassionate and humanitarian gesture. Brezenzinski goes on to argue that:
the release of these prisoners will remove from the agenda of the United nations, the Non-Aligned Movement, and other international fora, a propaganda issue which is used each year to criticize the U.S., and is increasingly used as an example of the inconsistency of our human rights policy.5
Robert Pastor makes a similar point in a memorandum dated September 26, 1978. After conducting a cost-benefit analysis of the situation, Pastor concludes:
I have come to believe that the risks of releasing (the Puerto Rican nationalists) unconditionally are minimal, while the benefits, as a humanitarian, compassionate gesture, are considerable. I also believe that the President would obtain considerable political benefit in Puerto Rico as there is widespread support for such a move there.6
THE CASE OF THE CUBAN FIVE
Critics of US policy today point to the case of the Cuban Five as an example of American double-standards: the terrorists are allowed to roam free in Miami and those who went to Miami to protect Cuba against the terrorists are thrown in jail. The Cuban Five are part of a team of agents that Cuba sent to Miami to gather evidence against those guilty of orchestrating a campaign of terror against civilian targets in the island: a campaign of terror that has claimed over 3,000 lives. The team infiltrated Cuban-American terrorist groups in Miami, and using the evidence that the Five gathered Cuba provided the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) with the names and whereabouts of the terrorists. Rather than arrest and prosecute the terrorists, the FBI learned that Cuba had penetrated the Miami-based terrorist network and arrested the Cuban Five in 1998. On June 8, 2001, they were convicted and sentenced to four life sentences and 75 years collectively.
The United States Supreme Court is expected to rule sometime this year whether the Court in Miami that convicted and sentenced them erred by forcing their trial in a Miami consumed with hostility and prejudice against Cuba. Ten Nobel Prize winners have submitted amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs asking the Supreme Court to review the case. The Nobel laureates are joined by hundreds of parliamentarians around the world, including two former Presidents and three current Vice Presidents of the European Parliament, as well as numerous US and foreign bar associations and human rights organizations.
The United Nations Human Rights Commission noted that a climate of bias and prejudice in Miami surrounded their trial, and the Commission’s Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions concluded that the trial did not take place in the climate of objectivity and impartiality that is required to conform to the standards of a fair trial.7
However, even if the Cuban Five were to win their case before the United States Supreme Court, their case would be far from over. Instead, it would mean the beginning of a new trial in a jurisdiction other than Miami. A far more elegant and swifter solution to their continued imprisonment would be a Presidential Order of Executive Clemency that would permit their immediate return to Cuba.
POLITICAL PRISONERS?
One important point of diplomatic disagreement between the two countries is that to Cuba they are political prisoners, whereas to the United States the Five are common criminals.
Innocent of the conspiracy charges against them, Cuban officials maintain the Five were convicted in a biased and hostile environment in violation of their constitutional rights.
The issue of classifying the Five as political prisoners is particularly thorny, since President Obama will certainly reject the implication that the US is holding political prisoners. Yet, President Barack Obama has consistently called for Cuba to release its political prisoners, before any normalization of relations.
Cuba, in turn, claims that its own prisoners are serving sentences on the island for violations of the law and that they are not political prisoners.
A direct prisoner exchange runs the risk of the public equating the crimes, but a unilateral gesture that is followed by a gesture from the other side softens the criticisms.
Again, history illuminates our way out of political gridlock. Prior to the mutual exchange of prisoners in 1979, both Cuban and American negotiators initially tripped over the use of the adjective political to describe the prisoners. That is why they shied away from a direct prisoner exchange that would have been seen as a tacit acceptance of the notion that each country was holding political prisoners.
In a letter to Congressman Benjamin Gillman in 1979, Brzezinski said “we want to avoid making any connection between the two cases, and certainly the appearance of equating their crime.8 And in a memorandum immediately after release of the Puerto Rican nationalists, Brzezinski said:
we rejected the possibility of a prisoner exchange since we did not consider the Puerto Ricans political prisoners . . . Now that President Carter has decided to commute the sentences of the Puerto Ricans, it occurs to us that it is Castro’s turn to fulfill his promise.9
The key to a mutual release of prisoners is therefore to avoid a linked prisoner exchange and instead engage in gesture-for-gesture negotiations.
THE PRISONERS IN CUBA
If the Obama Administration extended a gesture to Cuba and unilaterally released the Cuban Five, what reciprocal gesture could Cuba offer? What prisoners could it free and send to the United States?
Miami’s El Nuevo Herald recently cited the cases of several prisoners in Cuba that may be of particular interest to the United States, including some of those who were arrested in March of 2003 and convicted in Cuba for working under the direction and control of the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, as well as other Cuban citizens imprisoned for espionage in Cuba.10
Through diplomatic channels, the United States can signal which of Cuba’s prisoners are a priority. That is not a problem.
THE POWER OF EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY
The power to commute a sentence is the President’s alone. It is not a pardon. It simply reduces the period of incarceration. The President need not comment on the convictions, or on the alleged crimes. He need not condition the commutation of sentences on another country’s actions. He simply orders that the prisoners’ sentences be reduced.
CONCLUSION
First as a candidate and now as President, Barack Obama has let it be known that he is interested in improving relations with Cuba through direct diplomacy. The case of the Cuban Five is a major stumbling block to any rapprochement between the two countries.
If President Obama extends executive clemency to the Cuban Five and commutes their long prison sentences, thus facilitating their return to Cuba and to their families, it would be quite a significant gesture and, after reciprocal gestures from Cuba, could eventually lead to the normalization of relations between the two countries.
José Pertierra is an attorney. He represents the government of Venezuela in the extradition case involving Luis Posada Carriles. His office is in Washington, DC.
Notes.
1 Raúl Castro marca su lógica a Washington, por Patricia Grogg, IPS, 20 de diciembre de 2008.
2 See TIME Magazine, Monday October 1, 1979. “A diplomatic issue involving Cuba was resolved last week when Havana released four Americans from its prisons. For four years, Fidel Castro had said that they would be freed if the US released four Puerto Rican nationalists who were in prison for trying to assassinate President Truman and House leaders in the 1950s. Carter granted them clemency two weeks ago. . . . On arrival in Miami, one of the former prisoners in Cuba, Lawrence Lunt . . . readily admitted that he had been spying for the CIA.”
3 That Infernal Little Cuban Republic: the United States and the Cuban Revolution, by Lars Schoultz, the University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, 2009 at page 324.
4 Undated letter from Zbigniew Brzezinski to John R. Standish, Pardon Attorney, for the Department of Justice. Found on pages 267 and 268 of volume 2 of Futuros Alternos (Documentos Secretos) Edited by Jaime Rodríguez Cancel and Juan Manuel García Passalacqua, EMS, 2007.
5 Ibid.
6 Memorandum from Robert Pastor of the National Security Council to Zbigniew Brzezinski and David Aaron regarding Lolita Lebron, dated September 26, 1978. Futuros Alternos, Ibid, at pages 228 and 229.
7 Grupo de Trabajo sobre la detención arbitraria (Naciones Unidas), Opinión No. 19-2005. Opinión adoptada el 27 de mayo de 2005.
8 Letter to Congressman Benjamín Gillman, US House of Representatives, from Zgigniew Brzezinski. See Futuros Alternos at page 213.
9 Memorandum from Zbigniew Brzezinski to Frank Moore regarding US Prisoners in Cuba, See Futuros Alternos at page 214.
10 Abogados de espías cubanos no descartan “negociación política”, por Wilfredo Cancio Isla, El Nuevo Herald, 25 de enero de 2009.

LIES AT THE SERVICE OF THE EMPIRE

Yesterday Reuters headed the list of the international news agencies that mention Pedro Miret and Osmany Cienfuegos as two historical figures who have been dismissed from their posts by Raúl Castro.
The EFE Agency follows stating, verbatim: “Last March 2nd, they were dismissed as Vice Presidents of the Council of Ministers.”
The excuse for this thriller, widely circulated throughout the world, was the March 24th publication in the Official Gazette of the Decree about the restructuring of the Council of Ministers of the Government of Cuba, passed on the 2nd of this month.
Pedro Miret is a magnificent comrade, having great historical merits and whom we all respect and for whom I have a lot of affection. For several years now, for reasons of health, he is unable to occupy any post. The slow progress of his illness led to the gradual cessation of his political activities. It is not fair to describe him as having been “fired”, without any consideration whatsoever.
Osmany Cienfuegos, the brother of Camilo, carried out important tasks not only as Vice President of the Council of Ministers but also as Party member or fulfilling my instructions while I was Commander in Chief. He has always been, and still is, a revolutionary. His functions were gradually ceasing from a time much earlier than that of my illness. He no longer held the post of Vice President of the Council of Ministers. Comrade Raúl Castro, President of the Council of State, has absolutely no responsibility for any of this. In both cases, it was a matter of purely legal procedures.
Reuters and EFE are two of the western news agencies closest to the United States’ imperialist policy. The latter behaves more poorly even though it is much less important than the former.
In another cable on March 24th, making use of a customary technique, EFE takes the words of Joaquín Roy, director of the European Union Center in Miami, to print the following: “Spain has been rediscovered as a key country in certain regions of the world that are of interest to the United States such as Latin America, and in two countries in particular: Cuba and Venezuela”.
Right away, EFE adds: “The expert believed that the United States’ major interest, more than pressuring for an opening, changes, etc, is the stability on the Island.
“For years now, he explained, studies made by the U.S. security agencies do not indicate Cuba to be a military threat, but they remain alert to the development of changes in order to avoid eventual internal friction destabilizing the region.
“The United States is not interested for the result of an opening to be civil war in Cuba”.
The European Union and Spain, according to Roy, have no problem working alongside the United States but, ‘with caution’ so that from Cuba it is not understood to be, or is accused of being, following Washington’s lead.
It couldn’t be more crystal clear: the ideas of the old Spanish empire on crutches, trying to assist the corrupt, tottering and genocidal Yankee Empire.
Nothing has been learned by the United States superpower and the Spanish mini-power about the heroic resistance of Cuba


Fidel Castro Ruz
March 25, 2009

Cuba and its domestic dialectics

By Luis Sexto

Read Spanish Version - http://progreso-semanal.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=878&Itemid=1

Is Cuba moving or not? That's the question posed by analysts and friends, supporters and foes, both inside and outside the island. The Cuban government might be the only one that cannot avoid the questioning, the doubt that some of its acts generate. And it is pelted with stink bombs whether it advances or appears to remain motionless.
Everybody knows that in Cuba there's always "something happening." Although some gaps of information diminish our revolutionary enthusiasm or appear to grant legitimacy to the predictions of those who don't want the socialist republic to advance toward efficiency and effectiveness, many of us are comforted by the knowledge that the nation's most trusted men acknowledge that the 50-year-old aspiration of millions of people may be reaching the brink of hopelessness.
Sometimes we forget the domestic dialectics, which in recent years recorded two key moments: in November 2005, when Fidel warned that the Revolution might implode because of internal errors and vices, and on July 26, 2007, when Raúl spelled out the need to make structural reforms in Cuban society. Never before had the language of the Revolution penetrated so deep into our needs and urgencies as it did in those speeches, doubly historical because of their transcendence and timeliness.
Without minimizing the external causes of the problems and difficulties, those speeches brought part of the solution over into the domestic side, which might explain and justify why the Cuban society leaned toward economic transformations that are not exclusively based on "control and discipline."
I don't know if what I see or perceive is only a flaw in my alleged political shrewdness. I understand that the three hurricanes that devastated several towns and farmland dangerously loosened the soil where the bases had to be rebuilt. In addition, there is in Cuba a kind of "instability" derived from the same circumstances of living (almost everyone of us) from the miracle of depreciated wages, buying products in another currency that's exclusive, rather than inclusive. That crack in a society that's still unsatisfied demands caution before any structural renovation, in a planet that is economically, ecologically and morally bankrupt.
As I see it, Cuba today is a conjunction of doubt, resignation, enthusiasm, and liberating vocation. From that mixture, one can perceive that "something's happening" inside, although outside (particularly in Miami) some -- from a viewpoint that disqualifies and demonizes -- evaluate it in the terms of the liberal and neo-romantic rhetoric of Vargas Vila, who attributes any movement to the alleged struggle between caudillos and groups. This is what has happened after the last recomposition of the government, an act constitutionally scheduled for the beginning of each legislative session and whose postponement was announced on Feb. 24, 2008.
It seems, then, that the Cuban government is the only government in the world that must publicly explain the reasons for its administrative adjustments. But, let's look at this contradiction: if the men remain a long time in their posts, there is criticism about the leaders staying in power "for an eternity," about motionlessness, impunity and other similar arguments. If the government decides to remove some officials and appoint others, using an aseptic and delicate language -- the men are "liberated" or "promoted" -- the scandal sends the Web's newspapers and windows rattling.
How is this possible? What explanation will the Cubans give?
I would have liked to learn about the specific causes for Lage's or Pérez Roque's "liberation," as well as the "liberation" of the other ministers about whom no one shows any interest. Because I live in Cuba and know it without the distortions typical of Miami or Madrid, I don't believe that the change in ministers or officials has been determined by a flap between Raulists and Fidelists. As soon as I hear that some officials have been replaced by their deputies, I realize that "the struggle between groups" is inconceivable. Wasn't Bruno Rodríguez's relationship with the previous Chief of State and Government the same as -- or similar to -- Pérez Roque's?
Now then, the references in a recent Fidel reflection to both high-ranking functionaries were intended to clarify the real reasons for the substitution, which the government's official announcement did not reveal. Apparently, the Leader of the Revolution mentioned those reasons so as to keep people from fantasizing, to restrain speculation from the media, where some analysts earn their living by trying to pin the tail on the donkey while blindfolded.
Maybe us Cubans inside and outside, along with the alleged foreign experts, need to get used to seeing leaders and cadres come and go as they do in any other country, without walking them between two lines of whips, unless they have committed such harm that they deserve a trial or a denunciation broadcast over loudspeakers.
I do not doubt that the ministerial change and the reminder of the constitutional role of the secretaries of the executive committee of the Councils of Ministers and State show that the state organization is moving toward a shape that is less voluminous, better adjusted to the circumstances in Cuba, and thus more efficient. Of course, that has been expressed by the authorities. But this commentator, who has written so much against the bureaucratic procedures, believes that government readjustment can be part of a strategy to "debureaucratize" Cuban society.
For the time being, any other assumption will have to wait for confirmation until the next Communist Party Congress, tentatively set for this year's en. Although many refuse to believe it, any decision, any program that implies changes in the socio-economic structure, has to be approved by the congress of the party in power.
Within logical doubts in a convulsed era, in Cuba there is a certainty that the Revolution and the aspirations of justice, equity and authentic freedom of millions of Cubans have not failed; they've only been delayed. And they would be lost for sure if the helmets of the new barbarians of Attila (as described by Rubén Darío) cross the Straits of Florida. A supreme difference separates us: we're interested above all in independence and social justice. To them, these national values are as important as the extinction of the gazelle is to the lion.

Luis Sexto, a Cuban journalist who won the 2009 José Martí national journalism award, writes a column every Friday in the newspaper Juventud Rebelde. He now contributes regularly to Progreso Semanal/Weekly.

Amnesty International issues new campaign on visas for Adriana and Olga

URGENTE ENVÍO DE CARTAS
A LAS 3 DIRECCIONES ESCRITAS EN ROJO
EL 10 DE ABRIL ADRIANA, LA ESPOSA DE GERARDO HERNÁNDEZ, UNO DE LOS CINCO CUBANOS PRESOS POLÍTICOS EN EEUU, TIENE LA ENTREVISTA EN LA SINA, SECCIÓN DE INTERESES NORTEAMERICANA EN CUBA

POR ADRIANA Y OLGA YA!!!

Amnesty International issues new campaign on visas for Adriana and Olga

antiterroristas.cu
2009-03-25

USA: Unjust Punishment: Cuban wives denied visas for ninth time
Adriana Pérez and Olga Salanueva, Cuban nationals whose husbands are serving lengthy prison sentences in the USA , have for the ninth time been denied temporary visas allowing them to visit their husbands. Olga Salanueva has been told that she is now permanently ineligible for a visa.
The US authorities have denied successive visa applications from both women over the course of seven years. The reasons cited for the denials are based on claims that both women are threats to national security. Yet neither woman has faced charges in connection with such claims, nor has any credible evidence been produced to substantiate the allegation. Over the years, the grounds cited for denying temporary visas has varied, highlighting an inconsistency in the authorities´ reasoning for prohibiting the women's visits to their husbands.
Adriana Pérez´s latest application was rejected in January 2009 due to her status as "non-eligible" under the US `Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002´ . This legislation restricts the "issuance of visas to non-immigrant´s from countries that are state sponsors of international terrorism".
"I have lived in Cuba since I was born, yet this is the first time that US authorities have used this piece of legislation to deny me a visa. It is a paradox that the families of the other `Cuban Five´, who also live in Cuba , continue to receive visas in spite of this Act". Adriana Pérez March 2009
Olga Salanueva´s most recent application was refused on the grounds that she was deported from the US in November 2000.
The women´s husbands, René González and Gerardo Hernández, are part of a group known as the `Cuban Five´ or `Miami Five´, who have been imprisoned in the USA since 1998. They were found guilty of "acting as unregistered agents of a foreign government" and related charges. Although some Cuban relatives in the case of all five prisoners have been granted visiting visas, they have experienced considerable delays ranging from a couple of months to two years before learning their applications were successful. Prior to her deportation in 2000, during René González´s trial, Olga Salanueva had been living legally in the US . She was subsequently granted a visa to visit her husband in March 2002, which was revoked on 23 April 2002, shortly before her trip. In 2002 Adriana Pérez obtained a visa to visit her husband but was detained upon arrival in the USA and expelled 11 hours later.
Denying prisoners visits from their family in these circumstances is unnecessarily punitive and contrary to standards for humane treatment of prisoners and states´ obligations to protect family life. The organization has urged that these restrictions be reviewed, drawing the government´s attention to international standards that stress the importance of the family and the right of all prisoners to maintain contact with their families and to receive visits. In the case of prisoners whose families live outside the USA , indefinite or even permanent denial of visits from the prisoner´s immediate family is a severe deprivation to the individual.
Amnesty International urges the US government to once again consider granting temporary visas to the two women for visitation purposes.
Amnesty International continues to review the case in consideration of the fairness of the criminal proceedings leading to the convictions of the five men.
PLEASE SEND APPEALS TO:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, THE U.S DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Call on the Secretary of State to overturn the decision that Adriana Pérez is "non eligible" under the US `Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002´ .
Urge her to grant temporary visas on humanitarian grounds to Adriana Pérez and to Olga Salanueva so that they may visit their husbands in prison in the USA .
Secretary Janet Napolitano, THE U.S DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Call on the Secretary of Homeland Security to overturn the decision that Olga Salanueva is permanently ineligible for a visa.
Urge her to grant Olga Salanueva a temporary visa on humanitarian grounds so that she may visit her husband.
in both letters, please express concern that:
By denying temporary visas for visitation purposes, the USA is imposing unnecessary punishment on the prisoners beyond the constraints of their imprisonment, in contravention of international human rights standards.
Note that, the families of all five prisoners have experienced considerable delays in being granted visas to the USA . Urge that such visas are granted to the families without undue delay.
Please send copies of both letters to the Office of Cuban Affairs
ADDRESSES:

U.S Department of StateSecretary of State Hillary Rodham ClintonU.S Department of State2201 C Street NWWashington DC 2052OUSA

The U. S Department of Homeland SecuritySecretary Janet NapolitanoU.S Department of Homeland SecurityWashington DC 20528USA

The Office of Cuban AffairsDirector Bisa WilliamsOffice of Cuban AffairsUS Department of State2201 C Street NWWashington DC 20520USA
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/041/2009/en
www.antiterroristas.cu

"...los asuntos que estamos presentando, nos dan en este momento la más grande de nuestras oportunidades para liberar a los Cinco. Este es un momento crítico y es muy importante que la red de apoyo esté al tanto e involucrados activamente en el caso." Leonard Weinglass, abogado estadounidense del equipo de la Defensa; www.thecuban5.org (Comité Internacional por la Libertad de los Cinco)

Reflexiones del compañero Fidel

LA MENTIRA AL SERVICIO DEL IMPERIO

La Reuters encabezó ayer la lista de las agencias internacionales de noticias que presentan a Pedro Miret y a Osmany Cienfuegos como figuras históricas destituidas por Raúl Castro.
Le sigue en orden la EFE, que textualmente afirma: “fueron destituidos como Vicepresidentes del Consejo de Ministros el pasado 2 de marzo.”
El pretexto para esta intriga, ampliamente divulgada en el mundo, fue la publicación en la Gaceta Oficial, el día 24 de marzo, del Decreto sobre la reestructuración del Consejo de Ministros del Gobierno de Cuba, aprobado el día 2 de este mes.
Pedro Miret es un magnífico compañero, con grandes méritos históricos al que todos respetamos y por el que siento gran afecto. Hace varios años, por razones de salud, no puede ocupar cargo alguno. La lenta instalación de su enfermedad dio lugar al cese progresivo de su actividad política. No es justo presentarlo como un “destituido”, sin consideración alguna.
Osmany Cienfuegos, hermano de Camilo, realizó importantes tareas, no solo como Vicepresidente del Consejo de Ministros, sino también como miembro del Partido o cumpliendo instrucciones mías cuando era Comandante en Jefe. Fue siempre y es revolucionario. Sus funciones fueron cesando progresivamente, desde mucho antes de que yo enfermara. Ya no ejercía como Vicepresidente del Consejo de Ministros. El compañero Raúl Castro, Presidente del Consejo de Estado, no tiene responsabilidad alguna en esto. Se trataba, en ambos casos, de trámites simplemente legales.
Reuters y EFE son dos de las agencias occidentales más cercanas a la política imperialista de Estados Unidos. La segunda a veces se comporta peor, aunque es mucho menos importante que la primera.
Haciendo uso de una técnica habitual, EFE toma las palabras de Joaquín Roy, director del European Union Center, de Miami, para publicar en otro cable del 24 de marzo, lo siguiente: “Se ha redescubierto a España como país clave en ciertas regiones del mundo de interés para Estados Unidos como América Latina y en particular, en dos países: Cuba y Venezuela.”
De inmediato EFE añade: “El experto consideró que el mayor interés de Estados Unidos, más que presionar para la apertura, los cambios, etcétera, es la estabilidad en la Isla.
“Desde hace años, explicó, los estudios de las agencias de seguridad estadounidenses no señalan a Cuba como una amenaza militar, sino que permanecen atentos al desarrollo de cambios para evitar que las eventuales fricciones internas puedan desestabilizar la región.
“A Estados Unidos no le interesa que el resultado de la apertura sea una guerra civil en Cuba.
“La Unión Europea y España, según Roy, no tienen inconveniente en trabajar conjuntamente con Estados Unidos pero, ‘con cautela’ para que no se dé a entender o se les acuse desde Cuba, de que siguen la guía de Washington.”
Más claro ni el agua: las ideas del viejo imperio español en muletas, tratando de ayudar al corrupto, tambaleante y genocida imperio yanqui.
Nada han aprendido la superpotencia de Estados Unidos y la minipotencia española de la heroica resistencia de Cuba a lo largo de más de medio siglo.

Fidel Castro Ruz
Marzo 25 de 2009
3 y 02 p.m.

URGENT ACTION FOR VISAS FOR FAMILIES OF THE CUBAN FIVE

http://www.thecuban5.org/UrgentAction.html

To all those who are defenders of just causes:
On April 10th, family members of the Cuban Five imprisoned in the United States have an appointment in the U.S. Interests Section in Havana, Cuba, to request their visas. This will be the tenth time that Adriana Perez, wife of Gerardo Hernandez, will request a visa to see her husband in a prison in the U.S. where he is serving an unjust sentence. During a decade, the United States government has denied this couple the possibility of seeing each other.
We ask you to join in this urgent action to support them and their family members by faxing, calling or sending a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton immediately and no later than April 10th to request the following:
To immediately grant a humanitarian visa to Adriana Pérez to visit her husband Gerardo Hernández and put an end to the violation of the right of family visits. To grant multiple visas for the other members of the family of the Cuban Five
Contact Information:U.S. Department of State Hillary Clinton 2201 C Street, NW Washington, DC 20520
Fax number: 1-202-647-2283 Phone number: 1-202-647-4000

We also ask you to contact the Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, to ask her the following:
To immediately grant a humanitarian visa to Olga Salanueva. On July 2008, Olga was unjustly classified as “permanently ineligible.” Ask Mrs. Napolitano to exempt Olga Salanueva of that condition by granting her a humanitarian visa to visit her husband Rene González in a U.S. prison.
Contact Information:Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano
U.S. Department of Homeland SecurityWashington, DC 20528
Fax Number: 202-282-8401 Comment Line: 202-282-8495 Operator Number: 202-282-8000
If possible, sent electronic copy of both requests to:
High Commissioner for Human Rights
Email: InfoDesk@ohchr.org
Urgent Action: Email: urgent-action@ohchr.org 1503
Denunciation Procedure: Email: 1503@ohchr.org

CUBA HAS A NEW GOVERNMENT

Fidel: ',,,not them ( the US ) but only we, ourselves, can destroy the Revolution,,,'

A lot of fuzz about as well the amplitude as about the disappearance of some internationaly wellknown faces, vice-president of the Counsel of State and secretary of the Counsel of Ministers Carlos Lage, and minister of Foreign Affairs Felipe Perez Roque.Both have an impressive record : Lage as the architect ( together with Raúl ) of the economical revival since 1990; Perez Roque as the inspirer and animator of the open and positive international relations.The last ten years they were considered belonging to the new generation that should preserve the continuety of the Revolution.What happened that Fidel wrote about ' misbehaviour ' and ' being tempted by the honey of power '.In their letters of resignation Lage and Perez Roque speak about the errors they made ( which ones ? ) , the conclusions they made of this, but also their remaining support for the Revolution and their loyalty to Fidel.
Rumours want, and there are a lot of them, that the aim for more productivity and discipline, the war against corruption and the possible conversations with the USA have something to do with it.Who will say ? Sure is that Obama is not prepaired to lift the Blockade, the softening of it is for internal purpose. As there is a conservative republican, Lugar, proposing to end the economical boycot of Cuba. As the voice of US-big-business he is frustrated watching the rest of the world having fruitful economical relations with Cuba. About the new Cuban government: the fusion of some related departments and therefor the substitution of some responsables is the logical consequence of the plans for rationalisation and the aim improving efficiancy :

“ ... in accordance with proposals by the President of the Councils of State and Ministers in the constitutional session of the 8th Legislature of the National Assembly of People’s Power on February 24, 2008, regarding the fact that "a more compact and functional structure is required today, with fewer agencies under the Central State Administration and a better distribution of their duties," the Council of State agreed in a meeting today (march 2, 2009) to make the following movements of cadres and to reorganize a number of agencies under the Central State Administration: To appoint Marino Murillo Jorge to the posts of vice president of the Council of Ministers and minister of economy and planning and to release him from his responsibilities as head of the Ministry of Domestic Trade. To release Otto Rivero Torres from his responsibilities as vice president of the Council of Ministers, taking into account that the transfer of programs he attended to the respective investment agencies has concluded. The vice president of government, Ramiro Valdés Menéndez, will be in charge of their coordination and control. To merge the Ministry of Foreign Trade and the Ministry of Foreign Investment and Economic Cooperation, and to appoint Rodrigo Malmierca Díaz as head of the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment, a designation that includes the country’s economic cooperation activities. To merge the Ministry of the Food Industry and the Ministry of the Fishing Industry and to appoint María del Carmen Concepción González, as head of the Ministry of the Food Industry, a designation that includes the activities of the fishing industry. ...... To release Felipe Pérez Roque from his responsibilities as minister of foreign affairs and to promote the current first deputy minister, Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, to occupy that post. To release Georgina Barreiro Fajardo from the post of minister of finances and prices and to appoint in her stead Lina Pedraza Rodríguez. To release Fernando Acosta Santana from his post as minister of the iron, steel and heavy machinery industry and promote in his stead Major General Salvador Pardo Cruz, who occupied the post of general director of the Union of Military Industry. To promote Jacinto Angulo Pardo from first deputy minister to minister of the Ministry of Domestic Trade. To release Alfredo Morales Cartaya from the post of minister of labor and social security and to promote in his stead Margarita Marlene González Fernández, currently first deputy minister of that ministry. To appoint as minister of science, technology and the environment, a ministry to which attention to the scientific complex is transferred, José M. Miyar Barrueco, who was released for that purpose from his post as secretary of the Council of State. To appoint on an interim basis, subject to ratification by the National Assembly of People’s Power in the upcoming ordinary session period, Deputy Homero Acosta Álvarez to the post of secretary of the Council of State, with the duty of assisting and aiding the president, the first vice president, the vice presidents and other members of the Council of State in fulfilling the attributions of that body as defined in articles 89, 90 and 93 of the Constitution of the Republic. The post of secretary of the Council of State is not in and of itself an authority with State decision-making powers nor does is it in any way play a central role in the leadership of the State. To release Carlos Lage Dávila from his post as secretary of the Council of Ministers and to appoint in that post the current head of the Secretariat of the Ministry of the FAR (Revolutionary Armed Forces), Major General José Amado Ricardo Guerra, with the duty of assisting and aiding the president of the Council of Ministers, the first vice president and the other members of its Executive Committee in its activities, in accordance with Article 97 of the Constitution of the Republic and current legislation, and therefore, that post does not legally constitute an authority with government decision-making powers, nor does it in any way play a central role in the leadership of the government. In the framework of these decisions, the Political Bureau and the Council of State ratified the validity of the statements of Raúl Castro on February 24, 2008 when he said, "…Institutionalism is one of the pillars of the Revolution’s invulnerability in political terms, which is why we must work to constantly perfect it. We should never believe that what we have made is perfect." In accordance with the above, it was agreed that it is necessary to continue studying the government’s current structure with the objective of gradually reducing its magnitude and increasing its effectiveness... “

Remarkable is the tone of the official note of the Counsel of State on march 2, 2009.
Nobody's fired but liberated of his duties or tasks or has to hand over or transfer his responsibilities.The former chiefs mostly handed over to their assistants; others received another term of reference. One must always consider that in Cuba all decisions are made by mutual consent and that the dismissed ministers were present at the discussion and evaluation. This means that those who went made their own conclusions. ( see the letters of Lage and Perez Roque )
To conclude we have once again to refer to the historical speech of Fidel on november 17 in 2005: ',,,not them ( the US ) but only We, ourselves, can destroy the Revolution,,,'
And , remarkable, 2005, on december 23, in the Parliament, Felipe Perez Roque said :“...What would happen if you find yourself not capable to overcome the difficulties and to correct your mistakes that threatened to destroy your ideals...”

Paul Evrard
Infocuba Belgium

Outpouring of Support Worldwide Urging the U.S. Supreme Court to Review the Convictions of the Cuban Five
by Thomas GoldsteinMar. 6, 2009
In a previously unheard-of twelve separate briefs, an array of supporters worldwide - including ten Nobel Prize winners who have championed human rights (including East Timor President Jose Ramos-Horta and Irish peacemaker Máiread Corrigan Maguire); the Mexican Senate; and Mary Robinson, the former U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights and former President of Ireland - today filed amicus curiae ("friend of the court") briefs imploring the U.S. Supreme Court to review the Miami convictions of five Cuban government agents, the so-called "Cuban Five." Those participants in the briefs were joined by hundreds of parliamentarians from the European Parliament and other parliaments around the world, including two former Presidents and three current Vice-Presidents of the European Parliament, as well as numerous U.S. and foreign bar associations and human rights organizations.
This is the largest number of amicus briefs ever to have urged the Supreme Court to review a criminal conviction.
This extraordinary support for the Cuban Five's case arises from widespread concern in the United States and around the world that their trial was conducted in an atmosphere tainted by prejudice against agents of the Cuban government and fear of retaliation, which amici say prevented the jury from fairly evaluating the charges against the Five. Among others, the United Nations Human Rights Commission has condemned the Miami trial of the Cuban agents, marking the first and only time in history that that body has condemned a U.S. judicial proceeding. Citing a "climate of bias and prejudice" in Miami, the Commission's Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions concluded that the "trial did not take place in the climate of objectivity and impartiality that is required to conform to the standards of a fair trial."
The amicus briefs filed today ask the Supreme Court to review the fairness of trying the Cuban agents to a Miami jury. "The trial and conviction of the Cuban 5 is a national embarrassment," explained Michael Ratner, President of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represented the Nobelists in filing their amicus brief. "Our clients, ten Nobel Prize winners, acclaimed for their efforts to advance human rights, believe the trial was an international embarrassment as well. This was a trial that should have never occurred in Miami. There was no way a jury from that Miami, with its history of violence and intimidation against supporters of the Cuban government, could have reached a verdict free from retaliation by the anti-Castro community."
Several of the amicus briefs filed by U.S. organizations also ask the Supreme Court to review the prosecution's striking of African-Americans from the jury. The prosecutor used seven of its eleven "peremptory challenges" (where no explanation need be given to strike a juror) to strike prospective black jurors. The Court of Appeals ruled that no inquiry into the prosecutor's motives was required because three other black jurors, a minority on the twelveperson jury, were seated. Amici maintain that this holding allows prosecutors to mask their manipulation of the racial make-up of a jury.
The U.S. government's brief in opposition is presently due April 6. The Court is likely to decide whether to grant review before its summer recess in June.
The amicus briefs, along with a complete list of the amici, can be read here.
Additional background on the case:
The United States indicted the five Cubans in Miami in 1998. The indictment focused on the charge that they were unregistered Cuban agents and had infiltrated various anti-Castro organizations in South Florida.
One of the Five, Gerardo Hernandez, was also charged with conspiracy to commit murder for providing information to Havana on flights in which the anti-Castro group Brothers to the Rescue ("BTTR") would routinely invade Cuban airspace. On February 24, 1996, two BTTR planes were destroyed after both Cuban and American officials had repeatedly warned the Miami-based group to cease its illegal incursions into Cuban territory. Cuba maintains that it shot the planes down in its territory; the U.S. has maintained that the shootdown occurred a few miles into international airspace, after the planes entered and exited Cuban airspace.
The Cuban Five asked the trial judge to move the trial out of Miami to a new venue some thirty miles away, which is home to a massive Cuban-American exile community that, beyond its ordinary hostility towards the Castro regime, had been whipped into a frenzy of anti-Castro sentiment by the Elian Gonzalez debacle that took place just as the Cuban Five's trial got underway. Judge Lenard rejected that request, and a Miami jury convicted Hernandez and the others of all charges. Judge Lenard imposed the maximum possible sentences on the Five, including life imprisonment for Hernandez.
On appeal, a three-judge panel of the federal Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit reversed the convictions and ordered a new trial because, the court held, a "perfect storm" of community prejudice and pre-trial publicity, exacerbated by the federal prosecutor's inflammatory statements to the jury, deprived Hernandez and the other Cubans of a fair trial.
The entire Court of Appeals, however, vacated the panel's decision, finding no error in the government trying the case to a Miami jury. It returned the case to a panel to evaluate the remaining issues in the appeal.
In another key ruling, two of the three judges on the panel refused to reverse the Miami jury's conviction of Hernandez. Judge Kravitch dissented, finding a complete absence of any evidence that Hernandez knew there would be a shootdown, let alone an unlawful shootdown in international airspace.
http://www.freethefive.org/legalFront/LFAmicusPR30609.htm,

U.N. General Assembly President Demands Freedom for the Five at Human Rights Council
In Geneva this week, U.N. General Assembly President Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann of Nicaragua spoke before the U.N. Human Rights Council. In addition to denouncing U.S. atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, d'Escoto made a strong plea for freedom for the Cuban Five:
"And last but not least, dear brothers and sisters, I want to call your attention to the plight of the five Cuban heroes who are still being held in preposterous conditions and serving unheard-of jail sentences for having denounced and provided pertinent information concerning terrorist activities being planned in the U.S. by Cuban expatriates against their former Motherland with the support of U.S. authorities. We are very hopeful about meaningful and credible change being brought by the new U.S. Administration. The immediate exincarceration of the five Cuban heroes would help strengthen our confidence that the promised change is for real."
Read more http://www.freethefive.org/updates/USMedia/USMDEscoto30409.htm,

cartas F perez roque y c lage

Reflection Comrade Fidel
HEALTHY CHANGES IN THE COUNCIL OF MINISTERS
On the occasion of the changes in the heart of the executive branch, there are some cable agencies that are throwing up their hands in grief. Several of them are talking about or spreading the "rumors on the street" about how 'Fidel's men' have been replaced by ³Raúl¹s men². Most of those who have been replaced were never proposed by me. Almost without exception, they arrived at their positions by being proposed by other comrades in the Party or State leadership. I never devoted myself to that job. I have never underestimated human talent, or the vanity of man. The new ministers who have just been appointed were consulted with me, even though there is no rule saying that the people doing the proposing should do so since I gave up the prerogatives of power a while ago. They acted simply like genuine revolutionaries who bear their loyalty to principles. No injustice of any kind has been committed with specific cadres. Neither of the two mentioned in the cables as being the most affected, has spoken a single word in disagreement. It was absolutely not the absence of personal courage. There was a different reason. The sweet nectar of power for which they hadn't experienced any type of sacrifice awoke ambitions in them that led them to play out a disgraceful role. The enemy outside built up their hopes with them.
I do not accept the mixing up of gossip now with the World Baseball Classic that is about to begin. I have clearly said that our baseball athletes were first-class youth, and 'Homeland or Death' men. As I have stated before, we shall return with the shield or on the shield. We shall triumph because we know how to combine something that only free men are able to do, men who belong to no-one, not professional athletes. Leonel Fernández was telling me yesterday afternoon that the excellent professional baseball players from the Dominican Republic didn¹t want to take part in those competitions; they would be absent, causing pain to the nation where they were born. Chávez is still unaware why his magnificent pitchers and batters will be beaten by our athletes. This year, the Cuban team which will gauge its strength by the best U.S. and Japanese Major League professionals is much stronger and better trained than it was three years ago. Many of them are already veterans despite their youth. None of the men on the team stayed home, unless it was for health reasons. I assume total responsibility for success or defeat. The victories belong to us all; defeat shall never be an orphan.
Homeland or Death! We shall overcome!
Fidel Castro Ruz
March 3, 2009

Cuba Announces Govt Structural Changes

... the whole text of the official note emitted on government restructuring of ministries and officials´ movement in the State Central Administration.In accordance with the ideas expressed by President of the Council of State and Ministers, Army General Raul Castro Ruz, in the constituent session of the 7th Legislature of the National Assembly of the People´s Power on February 24, 2008, regarding that “it is required today a more compact and functional structure, with less number of organisms of the State´s central administration and a better distribution of the work they carry out,” the Council of State, on the proposal of its President, previously consulted with the Political Bureau of the Central Committee of the Party, agreed in a meeting carried out today, make the following changes of officials and restructuring in some organisms of the State´s Central Administration:
1. Relieve comrade Jose Luis Rodriguez Garcia from the post of Vicepresident of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Economy and Planning.Appoint comrade Marino Murillo Jorge in the post of Vicepresident of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Economy and Planning and release him from his responsibility as Minister of Domestic Trade.
2. Relieve comrade Otto Rivero Torres from his responsibilities as Vicepresident of the Council of Ministers, taking into account he has concluded the transfer of the programs attended by him to the respective investor organisms. Vicepresident of the Government, Ramiro Valdes Menendez will be in charge of its coordination and control.
3. Fusion the ministries of Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment and Economic Collaboration and appoint comrade Rodrigo Malmierca Diaz in the post of Minister of Foreign Trade and Foreign Investment, denomination that comprises the activities of Economic Collaboration carried out by the country.Relieve comrade Raul de la Nuez Ramirez from his responsibilities as Minister of Foreign Trade.
4. Fusion the ministries of Food Industry and the Fishing Industry and appoint comrade Maria del Carmen Concepcion Gonzalez, who was previously relieved from her duties as member of the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the Party, as Minister of the Food Industry, denomination that comprises the activities of the Fishing Industry.Relieve comrades Alejandro Roca Iglesias and Alfredo Lopez Valdes from their posts as ministers of the Food Industry and the Fishing Industry, respectively.
5. Relieve comrade Felipe Perez Roque from his responsibilities as Minister of Foreign Relations and promote current First Deputy Minister, Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla to that post.
6. Relieve comrade Georgina Barreiro Fajardo from the post of Minister of Finance and Prices and name in her place comrade Lina Pedraza Rodriguez, also released from her condition of member of the Secretariat of the Central Committee of the Cuban Communist Party (PCC in Spanish), responsibility from which she attended the global economic entities.
7. Relieve comrade Fernando Acosta Santana from the post of Minister of the Steel and Mechanic Industry and promote in his place the Brigadier General Salvador Pardo Cruz, who worked as Director General of the Military Industrial Union.
8. Promote comrade Jacinto Angulo Pardo, First Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Domestic Trade, to the post of Minister of that organism.
9. Relieve comrade Alfredo Morales Cartaya from the post of Minister of Labor and Social Security and promote in his place comrade Margarita Marlene Gonzalez Fernandez, currently First Deputy Minister of that organism.
10. Appoint as Minister of Science, Technology and the Environment, organism to which the Science Center (research) is added for its attention, comrade Jose M. Miyar Barruecos, who was relieved to that end from his condition of Secretary of the Council of State.
11. Appoint in an interim manner, subject to his ratification by the People´s Power National Assembly in the next ordinary session period, deputy Homero Acosta Alvarez in the post of Secretary of the Council of State, with the duty to assist and aid the President, the First Vicepresident, the Vicepresidents and the rest of the members of the Council of State in the performance of their duties according to Articles 89, 90 and 93 of the Constitution of the Republic. The post of Secretary of the Council of State does not constitute in itself a decision-making authority and does not have any protagonism in the direction of the State.
12. Relieve comrade Carlos Lage Davila from his post of Secretary of the Council of Ministers and appoint to that responsibility the current chief of the Secretariat of the Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces, Brigadier General Jose Amado Ricardo Guerra, with the function of assisting and aiding the President of the Council of Ministers, the First Vicepresident and the rest of the members of the Executive Committee in their activities, corresponding to article 97 of the Constitution of the Republic and the current legislation and thus this post does not legally constitute an authority with decision-making functions in government matters nor it is attributed to him any protagonic role in the direction of the Government.

In the framework of these decisions, the Political Bureau and the Council of State ratified the validity of the words of comrade Raul Castro on February 24, 2008 when he expressed: “…the institutionality is one of the pillars of invulnerability of the Revolution in the political area, that is why we must work to constantly perfect it. Not think ever that which we have done is perfect.” In correspondence with the aforesaid, it was deemed necessary to continue studying the current structure of the Government with the aim to reduce gradually its magnitude and heighten its efficiency.

The tiger we need to tame
By Luis Sexto

In Cuba, people say, bureaucratic attitudes respond with a problem for every solution, with a "no" to a "yes." They dilute every initiative in papers and meetings. And they see reality through the color of their windowpanes, or from their balconies, usually high and distant from the street or the factories. Or through reports that are usually adulterated by those who do not wish their errors to be known.
Therefore, any project to renew and improve socialism in Cuba -- in addition to facing the opposition generated in Miami, Washington and Madrid, and by those inside the country who try in various ways to push Cuba into capitalism -- will first have to annul bureaucratic resistance. That's because everything that appears to be a limitation of the bureaucracy's interests, its privileges, its ability to delegitimize every constructive decision and every freedom will meet with bureaucratic hostility, in the form of indifference, extremism or distortion. There is more than enough proof of this.
For example, why did the countryside fill with government offices after Fidel Castro once denounced (and President Raúl Castro condemned again) the spread of the marabú weed? Not long ago, a Havana newspaper published a complaint from a reader. A train and a truck crashed at some railroad crossing and, to prevent a repetition of the accident, the local functionaries shut down the crossing with two concrete barriers. Now, if sick people need to drive to the clinic on the other side of the former crossing, 30 yards away, they'll have to make an 8-kilometer detour. Sounds like a joke, but it is an administrative decision.
We see it clearly: the greatest danger of the bureaucratic mentality and norms may be that they impede the self-regulation of socialism. Usually, we do not speak about that mechanism, which we attribute to capitalism. Why does any rectification cost so much and take so long? Living organisms tend to persist in their existence; therefore, to reject reshaping and correction implies the probability of that purpose. And recent history confirms this.
The so-called real socialism was born with the bacteria of self-destruction buried deep in its structure. And those corrosive germs are essentially related to the vertically rigid organization that facilitated the birth and hierarchy of a bureaucracy that, according to Marx scholars such as the Mexican Adolfo Sánchez Vázquez, became a system of class -- if not in itself, then for itself, I might clarify -- and politically fed from the surpluses produced by the workers, who, paradoxically, received their salaries in the socialist organization that followed Red October.
Soviet and European socialism, therefore, dissolved thanks to the bureaucratic distortions that forced political discourse to float in the air, dazzled by its own vision of itself, even as it didn't recognize reality on the streets. It will not be necessary to continue to invent enemies other than those we already recognize.
In summary, the principal causes of the extinction of 20th-Century socialism, the socialism that failed, were within itself. It incubated the mentality (not to say the class) that discarded the use of power that was truly exercised by the workers in socialism by using an unbridgeable dichotomy: verticality vis-à-vis a democratic horizontality. And, let's admit it: where democracy is absent and centralism expands at the expense of both sides, bureaucracy prospers. And with it, dogma and corruption grow.
Definitions of the term "bureaucracy" have filled huge books. No need to recall them all. Let us restrict ourselves to the most basic definitions. According to the Spanish Dictionary of the Royal Academy, bureaucracy means an ensemble of public servants; always the excessive influence of functionaries in public affairs; and lastly, inefficient management, hampered by paperwork, rigidity and superfluous formalities.
José Martí foresaw the dangers of an uncontrolled bureaucracy that had taken over the reins of power. He branded "the bureaucratic life" as "a danger and a scourge" and hoped to see the Cuban republic free from the "plague of the bureaucrats." Evidently, the Apostle of Independence and Unifier of the Nation suspected that bureaucracy, as a representative of the people's interests, might at some time ignore those interests and protect its own interests as a group or caste. In that sense, Martí anticipated the opinions of Sánchez Vázquez and other theoreticians.
Today in Cuba, the rigidity, red tape and inefficient management attributed to bureaucracy by the Royal Academy dictionary has been a sort of Fairy Godmother in reverse: everything her magic wand touches becomes a caricature of socialist aspirations. It mistreats and infects every creative achievement Fidel Castro's Revolution brought to Cuba. Adapting an image by the acerbic Italian writer Giovanni Papini, bureaucracy -- transformed into a mentality, an ideology -- holds the secret of an alchemy that turns gold into excrement. In that sense, it has been an unconscious or involuntary accomplice of the U.S. blockade. Maybe, also unconsciously, it is to bureaucracy's advantage that the blockade will endure, as a guarantee of bureaucracy's interfering and anarchical existence.
In Cuba, then, an ideological and political confrontation also seems inexcusable. On the table are two cards: the survival of the Revolution, with its string of goals and aspirations still not fulfilled or deteriorated by almost 20 years of limitations; or its detour along paths that will denaturalize it. Because they are improvisational, cumbersome, limiting and alienating, bureaucratic indifference and inefficiency tend to liquidate the cause of socialism in the heart of the people. And the antidote would be the same people using more democratic spaces and controls, even in the economy.
Formulas don't exist, of course, except for the now-useless ones. Socialist solutions in Cuba will have to find their own way. And, in these circumstances, that is almost paradoxical. Can bureaucracy, with its pseudo-revolutionary affectations, its reluctance to consider any new idea, execute and support a process of readjustment that is careful but bold and timely?
It seems that, first, it will have to be reduced to the dictionary definition: an ensemble of public servants. That's its ideal state. But will we be brave enough to oblige it -- like the tamer to a tiger -- to walk, head low, to the corner where it belongs?

Luis Sexto is a journalist and professor at the School of Communications of the University of Havana. Last week he was named recipient of the 2009 Jose Marti National Journalism Award. He writes for several national publications and has contributed to foreign publications.


El tigre que hay que domar
Por Luis Sexto

En Cuba, dice la voz del pueblo, las actitudes burocráticas responden con un problema a cada solución; con un "no" a un "sí". Diluyen cada iniciativa en papeles y reuniones. Y ven la realidad a través de los colores de sus cristales, o desde el mirador de sus balcones, habitualmente altos y alejados de la calle o los talleres. O a través de informes que suelen estar adulterados por quienes no desean que sus errores se conozcan.
Por tanto, cualquier proyecto de renovación y perfeccionamiento del socialismo en Cuba, además de enfrentar la oposición que se gesta en Miami, Washington y Madrid, y de los que dentro del país pugnan de una u otra forma por empujar a Cuba hacia el capitalismo, tendrá por principio que anular la resistencia burocrática. Porque todo cuanto le parezca limitación de sus intereses, sus privilegios, su capacidad para deslegitimar toda decisión constructiva, toda libertad contará con la hostilidad de la burocracia, traducida en indiferencia, extremismo, distorsión. Hechos que lo confirmen sobran. ¿Por qué, por ejemplo, el campo se colmó de oficinas, como una vez denunció Fidel Castro o ha reiterado, aludiendo al marabú, el actual Presidente Raúl Castro? Hace poco, un periódico de La Habana publicó esta denuncia de un lector: En cierto crucero del ferrocarril central ocurrió un choque entre un tren y un camión. Y para que no volviera a suceder, los funcionarios correspondientes cerraron el paso con dos vigas de hormigón. Ahora, si los enfermos necesitan ir en automóvil al consultorio médico, sito a 30 metros, tendrán que recorrer ocho kilómetros. Parece una broma. Resulta, sin embargo, una decisión administrativa.
Lo vamos viendo claramente: el mayor peligro de la mentalidad y las normativas burocráticas puede estar en que impidan la autorregulación del socialismo. Habitualmente, no hablamos de ese mecanismo, que sí le atribuimos al capitalismo. ¿Por qué cuesta y demora tanto cualquier rectificación? Los organismos vivos tienden a persistir en su existencia y, por tanto, negarse a la readecuación y la corrección implica la probabilidad de ese fin que la historia más reciente confirma.
El llamado socialismo real surgió también, en efecto, con las bacterias de la autodestrucción enquistadas en sus estructuras. Y esos gérmenes corrosivos se relacionan en sus esencias con la organización verticalmente rígida que lo distinguió y facilitó el nacimiento y jerarquización de una burocracia que, de acuerdo con estudiosos marxistas como el mexicano Adolfo Sánchez Vázquez, derivó en clase --si no en sí al menos para sí, aclara el autor de este artículo-- y que se nutrió políticamente de la plusvalía producida por los trabajadores, aun paradójicamente asalariados en la organización socialista que siguió al Octubre Rojo.
El socialismo soviético y europeo se disolvió, pues, gracias a las distorsiones burocráticas que obligaron al discurso político a andar por los aires, deslumbrado por la visión de sí mismo, mientras desconocía la realidad a ras del suelo. No será necesario seguir inventando enemigos, a más de los ya reconocidos. En resumen, las causas principales de la extinción del socialismo del siglo XX, el que fracasó, están dentro de sí mismo: incubó la mentalidad, por no decir la clase, que echó al desaguadero el uso del poder verdaderamente ejercido por los trabajadores en el socialismo mediante una dicotomía insalvable: verticalismo frente a horizontalidad democrática. Y aceptémoslo: donde falta la democracia, y el centralismo se excede a costa de los lados, prospera la burocracia. Y con esta, el dogma y la corrupción.
El término burocracia ha merecido libracos enormes para su esclarecimiento. No habremos de recordarlo. Ciñámonos a lo más elemental en estos párrafos. Según el diccionario de la Academia de la lengua (DRAE), burocracia significa, además de otros pormenores, el conjunto de servidores públicos; también la influencia excesiva de los funcionarios en los asuntos públicos, y por último la administración ineficiente a causa del papeleo, la rigidez y las formalidades superfluas.
José Martí previó los peligros de una burocracia incontrolada, adueñada de los resortes del Poder. Tildó "la vida burocrática" de "peligro y azote" y quiso a la república cubana libre de la "peste de los burócratas". Evidentemente, el Apóstol de la independencia y unificador de la nación intuía que la burocracia como representante de los intereses del pueblo, podría soslayar en algún momento de su ejercicio esos intereses para tener solo en cuenta los suyos como grupo o casta, con cuyo hallazgo Martí se anticipa a los juicios de Sánchez Vázquez y otros teóricos.
Hoy por hoy, en Cuba, la rigidez, el papeleo, la ineficiente administración, que le atribuye el DRAE a la burocracia, ha sido una especie de Hada madrina al revés: todo cuanto su varita mágica toca se ha convertido en una caricatura de las aspiraciones socialistas. Maltrata, encona todo cuanto de creativo trajo la Revolución de Fidel Castro a Cuba. Acudiendo a una imagen del ácido escritor italiano Giovanni Papini, la burocracia, transformada en mentalidad, en ideología, posee el secreto de una alquimia que suele convertir el oro en excremento. En eso ha sido un auxiliar inconsciente o involuntario del bloqueo norteamericano. Quizás, también inconscientemente, le convenga que el bloque perdure como garantía de su existencia mediatizadora y anárquica.
En Cuba, pues, el enfrentamiento ideológico y político también parece inexcusable adentro.
Sobre la mesa, dos cartas: la supervivencia de la Revolución con su cola de metas y aspiraciones aún no cumplidas o deterioradas por casi 20 años de limitaciones, o su desvío por rutas que la desnaturalicen. La indiferencia e ineficiencia burocráticas, por improvisadoras, engorrosas, limitadoras, enajenantes, tienden a liquidar la causa del socialismo en el corazón del pueblo. Y el antídoto sería el mismo pueblo en uso de espacios y controles más democráticos, incluso en la economía. Las fórmulas, por supuesto, no existen, salvo las ya inservibles. Las soluciones socialistas en Cuba han de "hacer camino al andar". Y ello resulta, en estas circunstancias, casi paradójico: ¿Podrá la burocracia, con sus artificios seudos revolucionarios, sus melindres ante cualquier idea nueva, ejecutar, apoyar un proceso de readecuación cuidadoso pero osado y a tiempo?
Primeramente, parece, habrá que reducirla a eso que dice el diccionario: conjunto de servidores públicos. Ese es su estado ideal. Pero ¿tendremos valor para obligarla, como el domador al tigre, a marchar cabizbaja hacia el rincón subalterno que le corresponde?

Luis Sexto, periodista y profesor de la Facultad de Comunicaciones de la Universidad de La Habana. La semana pasada Sexto fue nombrado Premio Nacional de Periodismo José Martí 2009. El escribe para diferentes medios nacionales y ha colaborado con publicaciones extranjeras.