Trade winds stir Miami storm - Miami, Florida's Cuban residents clash over continuation of U.S. economic boycott against Cuba - Cover Story

0 Comments | Insight on the News, June 7, 1993 | by Shawn Miller

Throughout the crisis, Cuba has continued to spend heavily on Castro's military -- to the tune of $1.2 billion in 1991.

Castro has also instated a system of "tourist apartheid," in which Cubans are not allowed to use facilities open to foreigners. While the people feast on the island's flora, tourist-only restaurants advertise "35 varieties of hygienically prepared bread, 50 different pastries that delight the palate" and "delicious Cuban cooking -- from the traditional jerked beef dishes of slavery days to classical roast pork."

How has Castro managed to survive without a public insurrection? A growing number of people think that it boils down to a little gift from his enemy -- the Cuban Democracy Act.

"The Cuban people don't like the way they are living; they desperately want reform," says Cernuda. "But not enough that they want to go back to the pre-Revolution days, which is what they fear will happen if Castro falls and the U.S. turns them over to the Miami Cubans."

Cernuda says the Cuban-Democracy Act is known in Cuba as the Torricelli Amendment, a grim reference to the Platt Amendment, which virtually made the island a U.S. protectorate from 1901-34. "Castro has made sure that everybody knows every single detail in the Torricelli Amendment, especially the part that gives Cuba six months to form a democracy after his downfall," Cernuda says. "It was a lifesaver for the Cuban propaganda machine."

Hernandez calls such claims pure flights of fancy. "If Castro is happy about the embargo, how come he is trying so hard to convince Clinton to do away with it?" he asks, noting Castro's recent appearance on ABC's Prime Time Live, during which he hinted he would step down if the embargo were lifted.

Indeed, Castro has gone out of his way to charm the Clintons, calling the first lady a "beautiful woman" and the president "a man of peace." The last period of detente between the two countries occurred during Jimmy Carter's administration, and the prospects of another Democrat in office may have given Cuban officials some hope.

If so, they are bound to be disappointed. Doug Gray, a spokesman for the State Department, promises that the United States' position is clear: "We need to see significant change before we start any contact with Castro."

Hakim sees Clinton's endorsement of the Cuban Democracy Act as "a political gesture" to define his administration's unwavering position.

Cernuda observes that "under Reagan and Bush, the CANF grew from a pawn to a bishop in the war against communism." Now that the Cold War is over, he asks, "is the Clinton administration going to allow itself to be dictated by a mere bishop?"

As long as the CANF is seen as representing the wishes of a politically charged constituency, the answer to Cernuda's question is a resounding yes. When the CANF flexes its muscles, politicians tend to take notice. Even though the Bush administration initially opposed the Mack Amendment for the same reasons that U.S. trading partners did, all reservations were swept aside in an effort to cement the Cuban-American vote and pocket Florida's 25 electoral votes. Sen. Mack (of Mack Amendment fame) won his last election by a slight 30,000 votes in an electorate of 3 million. He would have lost if he had not received 95 percent support in the Cuban exile community.