12-07-2002

FOREIGN AFFAIRS: Fidel's Prisoners, Trade, and Uncle Ben's

Ricardo Alarcon is one of the most powerful leaders in Fidel Castro's
Cuba. Speaker of Cuba's National Assembly, Alarcon is also the Communist
island nation's former ambassador to the United Nations. Alarcon, 65, is a
longtime ally of Castro, whose authoritarian regime has controlled Cuba
since 1959. Veteran correspondent Lee Michael Katz interviewed Alarcon on
November 14. In the edited excerpts that follow, Alarcon discusses
everything from the U.S. trade embargo to political prisoners in his
country.


NJ: The U.N. General Assembly, by 173-3, just voted again in favor of
lifting U.S. sanctions against Cuba. Is there something different about
the resolution this year?


Alarcon: It has a special meaning-because this year, this resolution
expressed what could safely be described as a majority of the American
people, the farmers, and the majority in the House of Representatives that
voted on several proposals that would lift the embargo. Something new also
this year was the creation of the Cuba Working Group, a bipartisan group
in the House.


The other interesting point this year is that the U.S. representative to
the U.N. spoke and-quite obviously-was not very successful, because the
negative votes were exactly the same: the United States, Israel, and the
Marshall Islands. The positive votes increased by seven, with practical
unanimity from the international community. Every European country voted
for it. Clearly, it's a constant source of disagreement reiterated year
after year.


By the way, Israel is very loyal to the United States and I can understand
that, but Israel doesn't implement the embargo. We have Israeli investment
in Cuba. The United States cannot be more isolated in this case.


NJ: Is it significant that Minnesota's incoming Republican senator, Norm
Coleman, took a position against the U.S. trade embargo in the
campaign?


Alarcon: A number of Republicans very loyal to their president simply
disagree on that issue. Why? Because legislators have to reflect the views
of their constituencies, and particularly in the farm states, there is a
clear sentiment against the embargo.


But the administration has been pretty clear. The president announced he
would veto any proposal to change the present policy. I am certain that
policy will have to be changed someday. The sooner, the better.


NJ: What was the significance of the U.S. agricultural products fair held
in Cuba in September-the first in at least 40 years?


Alarcon: Farmers from 33 states plus D.C. and Puerto Rico-more than 300
firms-were there. It was a show of friendship. Also, Cubans could see
goods they remember from the past. The long-grain rice that was very
popular was imported from the States, for example. Younger Cubans cannot
remember, because they have lived their entire life with the
embargo.


NJ: Do you remember the brand of rice?


Alarcon: In the old days, there was a popular brand, I think Uncle Ben's.
It might be unfair for competitors, but that one had very good
publicity.


NJ: Do you think, perhaps, that any change in U.S.-Cuba relations might be
driven not from Washington, but from America's grassroots-farmers,
agribusiness, trading interests, humanitarian and church
communities?


Alarcon: I don't think those Americans who went down there were trying to
defy their government, their laws. They were exercising the legitimate
interests of farmers to sell. They remember the good old days when they
had, 90 miles from their shore, an important market-which has now doubled
in population.


But we are living through a clear paradox at the time when more people are
expressing themselves in favor of at least softening the policy. For the
first time, you have a number of individuals from a very narrow segment of
the Cuban-American community-this mafia from Miami, who are most
aggressive in terms of promoting hostility toward Cuban soil-occupying key
positions. In the case of Mr. Reich, this is well known. [Otto Reich is
special envoy to Latin America and was previously assistant secretary of
State.] But he is not alone. All of them came from the same bunch of
extreme right-wingers in the Cuban-American community.


NJ: Those people would say that any support for Cuba is helping a
repressive dictatorship.


Alarcon: But we are not asking for any aid from your side. I have nothing
against this administration extending its love for failed policies with
the entire country. But are American taxpayers aware that somebody gave
those positions to people who are only dedicated to fighting the Cuban
government?


NJ: Do you see the Cuban-American community changing over time, with the
influence of younger generations that did not flee the Castro
regime?


Alarcon: Yes, regarding the new generation. But I also want to make it
clear that this is not just a generation gap. These people who went to
Washington have been speaking out-their views have changed. They are
people of my generation or older. Among those people also are very
well-known exiles from the previous generation, former leaders of the Bay
of Pigs.


NJ: Recently, eight people flew a crop duster out of Cuba and sought
asylum in the United States. They'll be able to stay here, but are you
seeking the plane's return?


Alarcon: Of course. The plane doesn't belong to you. It's our plane. We
have an agreement that I signed personally in New York in 1994 by which
the United States committed to do whatever is necessary to fight against
the hijacking of planes. But now, if it can be useful for publicity
against Cuba, planes can enter your airspace illegally.


I don't think it is good for the American people, particularly in these
days when Americans are so concerned about their security against
terrorists, to send the message that you may play games with airplanes
entering your territory without permission. My friendly, neighborly advice
is, please don't do that. For your own sake.


I don't want to be rude with President Bush. I prefer to quote him. I
really love one of these phrases he has repeated: Those who harbor a
terrorist are as guilty as the terrorist himself. Fine. He should have
this phrase engraved in every room in the White House and read it from
time to time.


NJ: Recently, the United States expelled four Cuban diplomats, saying they
were engaging in activities "harmful" to the United
States-presumably spying. Will Cuba retaliate by expelling U.S. diplomats
from Havana?


Alarcon: You said that's what normally happens, but I have reason to
believe what Mr. Reich wanted is exactly that. He would like to have
Americans expelled from Havana, Cubans expelled from Washington. No
farmers going down, no rice being sold to Cuba-any sort of relations.
That's the aim of these people. We are not going to play their game. At
the same time, we are going to respond, but not necessarily in the manner
he may be trying to provoke.


NJ: Human Rights Watch, hardly an administration group, reported that, as
a one-party state, "Cuba restricted nearly all avenues of political
dissent." Clearly, Cuba doesn't have free media, free political
debate, free speech.


Alarcon: According to your view, maybe. It depends on the concept of
freedom, and freedom of expression, debate, and so on.


NJ: Under your view, do you think Cuba has free speech?


Alarcon: In a different manner, we have freedom you don't have. American
workers can lose their job at any moment without being consulted. You
can't do that in Cuba. You have to discuss every proposal in the economic
area with the participation of everybody. Millions of Americans should
have the right to discover what is a union.


NJ: Human-rights groups say there are hundreds of political prisoners in
Cuba.


Alarcon: Regarding prisoners, it is true that we have prisoners. Not as
many as Miami propaganda tries to have you believe.


NJ: You were presented a petition for political and economic reforms,
called the Varela project. Why didn't the National Assembly debate the
issue? If Cuba is an open society, why didn't you accept this
petition?


Alarcon: The international media is filled with constitutional law
experts. But the funny thing is, everybody referred to the constitution of
my country obviously without having read it. It is simply not true that
10,000 signatures can oblige me to call for a plebiscite to change the
foundations of the political and economic bases of the country. How many
signatures would you need, for example, for Americans who do not have
health insurance, which I believe are more than 40 million, to have that
enshrined in the Constitution as a right?


NJ: So, you're saying the signatures, there's a technical
reason...?


Alarcon: No technical reason. The most basic principle of legality in the
world, in any country on this planet-I don't know if in another part of
the solar system there is a different thing-is you cannot pass a law that
contradicts the constitution. We are not a tribe that may be pushed around
by foreign propaganda, so that a foreign country can decide how the
country should behave and invent its constitution.


Apart from that, have you counted the signatures? Have you seen them? I
have no guarantee whatsoever that those signatures, first, are legitimate.
That's not my function, to validate signatures.


NJ: U.S. officials, including Mr. Reich, have said that Cuba is developing
biological weapons capability. What is your response?


Alarcon: Those are vicious slanders of a professional liar. But President
Carter deserves, by far, more respect than those guys. He said publicly
before going to Cuba that he asked the CIA, the National Security Council,
specifically Mr. Reich, and the State Department, if there was any truth
about those allegations. The answer was no.


NJ: What did President Carter's recent visit mean to Cuba?


Alarcon: His visit contributed in terms of better understanding, from such
an important person like a president. By the way, it was not a new thing.
We had contact with him for a number of years, and he knew that he would
be welcome in Cuba.


NJ: Still, the United States has opposed the Cuban government virtually
since Castro took over in 1959. When do you think this could
change?


Alarcon: They may be missing the last opportunity they have, because it
will really be like a joke: talking about an embargo that nobody believes
in.


Lee Michael Katz

National Journal