Friday, January 13, 2006


Some interesting arguments have come Dobber's way concerning the human rights situation in Cuba. Following Dobber's focus on Castro's deteriorating human rights record. The old warhorse The General has responded with the below comments.

It may be worth considering the following factors:

1) Cuba has been subjected to an economic embargo by the USA since 1962 (after the failed invasion of the Bay of Pigs).

2) Since it is normal in S America to be invaded (Panama, Nicaragua etc) or ousted by coups (Chile, Guatemala etc) when a government does not cooperate with US interests. If Castro wants to progress he needs to protect progress (future and established). If Castro had not been firm then he would join the list of Allende and others...(e.g. convenient failures much lamented in the West)

3) Is Castro the only repressive dictator in the region? If he is not then why hasn't the USA decided to put sanctions on other dictatorships?

4) Repression or destruction? Could it be possible that the USA should shoulder some of the blame? If the economic embargo did not exist and the USA was not fanatically opposed to governments who are socially progressive...then Castro would not need to be so repressive. In 2003 a precedent was set...Iraq was invaded...Cuba was mentioned as being a similar rogue state...Castro starts to act he picks on dissidents...liberals in the West throw up their arms in horror!

5) Castro the dictator. I find this fact unpalatable. How can he allow total democracy when under siege. Be honest with yourself. What would happen? The well funded/US backed dissident movement in Miami would have a field day. Cuba would return to the normalcy the region. And I mean Haiti...(Worn torn, factionalised, impoverished, at the mercy of world markets....) Is this what you want for Cuba?

6) The solution. End the Embargo! Then end repression. The two are mutually exclusive.