Dear Editor,
One half of Guyana’s Ambassador to Venezuela Odeen Ishmael’s latest widely published commentary, ‘After the euphoria: The Fifth Summit of the Americas in perspective,’ that sought to put the just concluded Summit of the Americas in perspective, focused on fighting for the rights of the Cuban government and not so much on the rights of the Cuban people.
As a West Indian, I have no problem with regional governments and their representatives fighting for Cuba to be restored to the Organization of American states or urging the United States to lift its economic embargo against Cuba, but I really don’t understand how Caribbean countries (and their political representatives) who have benefited from some form of democracy, including free and fair elections, can boldly challenge the United States but are afraid or unwilling to challenge the Castro brothers to give democracy a shot in Cuba.
To read ad naseum all these opinions by politicians and political commentators asking the US to end its embargo against Cuba or to allow Cuba to re-enter the OAS without even asking Cuba to make some sort of concession on its part is a blatant hypocrisy that needs to be exposed and denounced. I am not going to repeat or even abbreviate what Dr Ishmael wrote, but urge anyone with even the slightest interest in the subject to get hold of a copy of the commentary and see what I am addressing here.
Meanwhile, Dr Ishmael, of all West Indian politicians, should know the experience of Guyanese who were denied free and fair elections and had certain basic human rights and freedoms infringed on during the authoritarian regime of Forbes Burnham, and so he should be in the forefront for the rights of the Cuban people in this regard. I am shocked at his galling indifference.
Lest he has forgotten our past and, therefore, risks helping us repeat, let me remind Dr Ishmael and all those who openly side with the dictatorial Cuban government that the PPP, which now forms the government in Guyana, spent 28 years in the political wilderness fighting patiently and assiduously to end the reign of the dictatorial PNC government. Back then, most of us thought the PNC’s illegality merely contributed to its dictatorship, but we are now coming to the realization that a regime can be legal and yet dictatorial.
Anyway, the only noticeable difference between the PNC dictatorship and its Cuban counterpart was the PNC gained power first through a coalition and then rigged its way at elections to retain power, while the Cuban government seized power in a coup and has refused to call free and fair elections, yet we have never heard the PPP call for an end to the dictatorship in Cuba like it had called for an end to the PNC dictatorship in Guyana. So the Ishmaels of Guyana and the Caribbean really need to have their hypocrisy checked at the door of balanced reasoning and stop exposing themselves for the leftwing apologists that they are.
And even though free and fair elections have been returned in Guyana, not all rights and freedoms have; Guyana still has some ways to go to match up with some of its more democratized sister Caricom countries, and so it is up to Guyanese to keep making lots of noise about their rights and freedoms being denied under the present regime, of which Dr Ishmael is a foreign representative.
Reverting to the Cuba factor, whereas most West Indians travel freely throughout the region and outside the region, ordinary Cubans can’t travel freely throughout the region or beyond, but must take to risky makeshift rafts on the dangerous high seas or wait for an opportunity to abscond when sporting teams make overseas trips. And whereas West Indians participate regularly in free and fair elections to pick the party they want to run their government, ordinary Cubans don’t have that basic political right. In addition, whereas West Indians can form political associations, publicly criticize and protest their governments or politicians, ordinary Cubans can’t. In fact, thousands are in Cuban jails for trying to exercise their political franchise.
So how can anyone in the Caribbean who has tasted or benefited from democracy, that includes free and fair elections and basic rights and freedoms, ask the United States to end its embargo against Cuba and allow Cuba to re-enter the OAS, but not empathize with the plight of ordinary Cubans by asking the Cuban government to make some concessions of its own? It seems to me like these politicians and commentators are more concerned about institutional ideology than about individual importance. Ergo, we seem to have leftist politicians/commentators taking advantage of democracy in the region with an agenda of supporting socialist dictatorships.
But all those elected West Indian politicians and free commentators who are bloodying America over Cuba need to stop and ask whether they could have been freely elected or the beneficiaries of free speech if America was not successful in promoting and defending democracy over communism in the region over the decades? What if America had failed and the Soviet Union had succeeded via its springboard in the region, Cuba, in the spread of communism? Would these politicians have ever been elected or known? Would commentators have had their diverse views published?
I am not saying America and or its version of democracy was or is perfect, but I am going out on a limb and saying that if West Indians could not vote for parties and politicians of their choice or speak their minds freely, thanks to democracy, we wouldn’t be hearing all these dissenting views from politicians, representatives and commentators. And since the wider Caribbean is the beneficiary of democracy, why aren’t our people helping the Cuban people fight for that benefit, rather than cozy up to the Cuban dictators and approve of their dictatorial behaviour?
Prior to the Summit of the Americas, US President Barack Obama, in an olive branch move, reached out to the Cuban government by lifting the travel and remittance restrictions, but while Raul Castro said he was willing to discuss anything Obama puts on the table, Raul’s brother, Fidel, quickly demonstrated that he is anything but retired, when he upended Raul and said not so fast. Where are the West Indian politicians and commentators to rake Fidel over the coals for being so intransigent? This galling hypocrisy by West Indian politicians and commentators frightens me to the extent that I am worried they are really apologists for the Cuban government who may be thinking about turning the region into an extension of Cuba!
Yours faithfully,
Emile Mervin
