"Cuban Syndrome" for the American authorities
In mid-April in the Bolivian city of Cartagena, the 6 Summit of the Two Americas will take place, the main motto of which is the words about the unification of all America (two continents) in the name of prosperity. Guided by this motto, one would think that today both America (North and South) are close as never before and are ready only to strengthen their partnership. However, in reality, this is far from the case. As soon as one of the main issues for discussion at the summit is the issue of non-observance of human rights and the absence of democratization in a single country, it is possible not to go to the fortuneteller, but to say for sure that the summit will turn into an explanatory conversation from the US about the “right” state politicians of other countries in the region. And at the same time, all other issues turn only into formal ones, the discussion of which is unlikely to take place at a decent level.
In this regard, the position of the United States, with its hackneyed record about the need for total democratization on the principles of Washington, has already served as the beginning of a big scandal. The beginning of this scandal was the next ban on participation in the summit for Cuba. The Cuban leadership once again from the US State Department and the White House said that the political situation on Liberty Island today is far from what could be called freedom from the American point of view. And until Raul Castro releases several thousand prisoners from prison that are considered political, and also does not carry out a series of social reforms aimed at liberalizing the public and economic life of the country, the United States is not ready to see the Cuban delegation at the same table at the Colombian summit. Canada adheres to a similar position on Cuba, which can hardly be called the personal opinion of Ottawa.
This position of Washington has caused a very strong reaction from the leaders of the so-called Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA). The President of Bolivia, known for his harsh remarks about the United States, on another attempt to isolate Cuba, said that the American desire to leave Cuba beyond the summit of the two Americas looks like a discriminatory and even racist position. Evo Morales called for a boycott of pressure exerted by the United States, and to continue an open dialogue with Cuba, without interfering in its internal affairs. The President of Venezuela expressed in the spirit that one country (the USA) is again trying to impose its position on all other Latin American states, being guided by remnants of the past. Hugo Chavez calls on Washington to abandon the harassment against Cuba and begin a serious dialogue with Raul Castro.
Due to the fact that the United States demanded a summit (either Cuba or the United States), Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos Calderon got into a difficult position. On the one hand, the Colombian authorities are closely cooperating with the United States, but on the other hand, if Bogota unequivocally accepts demands from Washington, then many Latin American leaders will subject the Colombian authorities to obstruction. On this basis, Santos Calderon decided to go to Cuba for talks with the Cuban leadership, although the signing of economic agreements with Venezuela was chosen as the formal reason, since at that time Hugo Chavez was undergoing treatment in Havana. After the talks with Chávez, Santos Calderon met with Raul Castro. According to Cuban and Colombian publications, it can be concluded that Castro urged Calderon not to enter into polemics with the United States over Cuba, since Cuba has already managed to get used to one-sided assessments of the situation on Liberty Island by Washington. At the same time, Raul Castro said that the lack of consensus about inviting or not inviting Cuba to the April summit expresses the opinion of only one state, which today is trying to solve any issues on the planet by its own methods.
The visit of Calderon, who, whether he tried to make amends if Cuba was not invited to the summit, or wanted to convey US opinion to the Cuban leadership, did not become the only foreign policy event of the month for Cuba. In late March, Pope Benedict XVI also visited Cuba. Can the US claims to Havana regarding non-observance of human rights and the visit of the pontiff be considered events unrelated to each other? Perhaps yes, but unlikely.
Arriving on the territory of the Island of Freedom, the Pope called upon all believing Cubans to “give their faith a new power” in order for the changes to come into Cuban society. Benedict XVI declared that every Cuban must seek the truth and sow brotherhood, reconciliation and create a new society.
These appeals looked rather strange for the country in which religion today is separated from the state, and at the same time the Catholic faith is very strong. What other strength should be given, according to Benedict XVI, of the Cuban faith, and what changes should occur in the souls and minds of Cubans in order to build a certain new society? In this regard, it can be assumed that the pontiff in his message to the Cuban people tried to emphasize the “wrong” position of the Cuban leadership, which resists the “democratization” going from one pole.
With all due respect to the personality of Benedict XVI, it must be remembered that the Vatican always tried to stay on the side of the powerful and advance their ideas through the skillful use of Catholic principles for the right purposes. It turns out that certain forces could well use the visit of the Pope of Rome to Cuba in order to once again remind the Cuban authorities of the "wrong" course, which they are preaching today. However, Cuban leaders skillfully separated the wheat from the chaff, delimiting the pastor’s visit of the pontiff and his remarks about building a new society. In particular, Raul Castro said that he appreciates the attention of the Holy See to the problems of Cuba, and at the same time said that it is a full-fledged dialogue and international cooperation that will help Cuba solve all these problems. Translated from diplomatic into ordinary language, Castro's words are as follows: your visit is a good thing, but you should not try to involve religion in solving international political problems.
In this regard, the summit of the two Americas in Colombian Cartagena can take place without Cuba, which did not heed the aspirations of Washington, expressed from the mouths of different people. However, one should not exclude the fact that other delegations - Bolivia, Venezuela and, possibly, Ecuador - whose president declares that Cuba’s isolation leads to destructiveness and have nothing to do with it, will not arrive in response to the US position. democracy.
From the side, the US position on Cuba is perceived only as the position of the state, which by and large does not give a damn about the state of affairs in the Cuban economy and public life. The only irritants for Washington on the Isle of Freedom are the Castro brothers, who at one time were able to show that American protégés can be successfully fought. And, apparently, the American leadership has already developed the “Cuban syndrome” at the gene level, which reminds them of the inglorious year for the US 1959.
In this regard, the position of the United States, with its hackneyed record about the need for total democratization on the principles of Washington, has already served as the beginning of a big scandal. The beginning of this scandal was the next ban on participation in the summit for Cuba. The Cuban leadership once again from the US State Department and the White House said that the political situation on Liberty Island today is far from what could be called freedom from the American point of view. And until Raul Castro releases several thousand prisoners from prison that are considered political, and also does not carry out a series of social reforms aimed at liberalizing the public and economic life of the country, the United States is not ready to see the Cuban delegation at the same table at the Colombian summit. Canada adheres to a similar position on Cuba, which can hardly be called the personal opinion of Ottawa.
This position of Washington has caused a very strong reaction from the leaders of the so-called Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA). The President of Bolivia, known for his harsh remarks about the United States, on another attempt to isolate Cuba, said that the American desire to leave Cuba beyond the summit of the two Americas looks like a discriminatory and even racist position. Evo Morales called for a boycott of pressure exerted by the United States, and to continue an open dialogue with Cuba, without interfering in its internal affairs. The President of Venezuela expressed in the spirit that one country (the USA) is again trying to impose its position on all other Latin American states, being guided by remnants of the past. Hugo Chavez calls on Washington to abandon the harassment against Cuba and begin a serious dialogue with Raul Castro.
Due to the fact that the United States demanded a summit (either Cuba or the United States), Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos Calderon got into a difficult position. On the one hand, the Colombian authorities are closely cooperating with the United States, but on the other hand, if Bogota unequivocally accepts demands from Washington, then many Latin American leaders will subject the Colombian authorities to obstruction. On this basis, Santos Calderon decided to go to Cuba for talks with the Cuban leadership, although the signing of economic agreements with Venezuela was chosen as the formal reason, since at that time Hugo Chavez was undergoing treatment in Havana. After the talks with Chávez, Santos Calderon met with Raul Castro. According to Cuban and Colombian publications, it can be concluded that Castro urged Calderon not to enter into polemics with the United States over Cuba, since Cuba has already managed to get used to one-sided assessments of the situation on Liberty Island by Washington. At the same time, Raul Castro said that the lack of consensus about inviting or not inviting Cuba to the April summit expresses the opinion of only one state, which today is trying to solve any issues on the planet by its own methods.
The visit of Calderon, who, whether he tried to make amends if Cuba was not invited to the summit, or wanted to convey US opinion to the Cuban leadership, did not become the only foreign policy event of the month for Cuba. In late March, Pope Benedict XVI also visited Cuba. Can the US claims to Havana regarding non-observance of human rights and the visit of the pontiff be considered events unrelated to each other? Perhaps yes, but unlikely.
Arriving on the territory of the Island of Freedom, the Pope called upon all believing Cubans to “give their faith a new power” in order for the changes to come into Cuban society. Benedict XVI declared that every Cuban must seek the truth and sow brotherhood, reconciliation and create a new society.
These appeals looked rather strange for the country in which religion today is separated from the state, and at the same time the Catholic faith is very strong. What other strength should be given, according to Benedict XVI, of the Cuban faith, and what changes should occur in the souls and minds of Cubans in order to build a certain new society? In this regard, it can be assumed that the pontiff in his message to the Cuban people tried to emphasize the “wrong” position of the Cuban leadership, which resists the “democratization” going from one pole.
With all due respect to the personality of Benedict XVI, it must be remembered that the Vatican always tried to stay on the side of the powerful and advance their ideas through the skillful use of Catholic principles for the right purposes. It turns out that certain forces could well use the visit of the Pope of Rome to Cuba in order to once again remind the Cuban authorities of the "wrong" course, which they are preaching today. However, Cuban leaders skillfully separated the wheat from the chaff, delimiting the pastor’s visit of the pontiff and his remarks about building a new society. In particular, Raul Castro said that he appreciates the attention of the Holy See to the problems of Cuba, and at the same time said that it is a full-fledged dialogue and international cooperation that will help Cuba solve all these problems. Translated from diplomatic into ordinary language, Castro's words are as follows: your visit is a good thing, but you should not try to involve religion in solving international political problems.
In this regard, the summit of the two Americas in Colombian Cartagena can take place without Cuba, which did not heed the aspirations of Washington, expressed from the mouths of different people. However, one should not exclude the fact that other delegations - Bolivia, Venezuela and, possibly, Ecuador - whose president declares that Cuba’s isolation leads to destructiveness and have nothing to do with it, will not arrive in response to the US position. democracy.
From the side, the US position on Cuba is perceived only as the position of the state, which by and large does not give a damn about the state of affairs in the Cuban economy and public life. The only irritants for Washington on the Isle of Freedom are the Castro brothers, who at one time were able to show that American protégés can be successfully fought. And, apparently, the American leadership has already developed the “Cuban syndrome” at the gene level, which reminds them of the inglorious year for the US 1959.
Information