The Commentator www

Cuba after Castro

Ted Rudow III,MA (Tedr77@aol.com)

Cuba is another situation in many ways, although it is also ruled by a dictator Castro, whom you might call a benevolent dictator, for he has a heart for his people. He has done much good for them, because he cares for them and wishes to see them prosper and do well. He is His child, although he does not admit it, and the Lord loves him and his people.

Fidel Castro

"Castro has become an old bottle, for he has grown set in his ways over the years, sometimes out of necessity"

Castro, like Saddam, has done both good and evil, both godly and ungodly things, and in his old age he seeks to make amends and to do better before he passes on. Cuba desires and needs a Latin government, one that will allows Cuba to flourish and grow, while keeping evil and iniquity under control and in check.

Many of the people chafe under the unnecessary restrictions and oppression. They do not need American-style democracy imposed upon them, but they do need more freedom. Castro has become an old bottle, for he has grown set in his ways over the years, sometimes out of necessity.

America fought him over the decades, and he vowed he would not change or give up, and he became rigid. But the world around him changed and Cuba changed, and his rigidity and inflexibility that once kept and preserved his people now works against them. He has become a man out of his time, leading a nation which he seeks to preserve from the world and even from the Lord’s influence, for he confuses Him with the church, as many people in the world do. So, since he sees both the injustices of the world and the church system, he seeks to preserve his people from both. But he nears the end of his days and Cuba too will change in the end.

[Back to Main Page]

Update on Mexico's Disputed Elections [From Main Page]

For many Mexican observers, a call for new national elections is extremely unlikely. Experts in electoral law appear quite confident that the TEPJF will confirm Calderón as the next elected president. If the Federal Tribunal indeed fails to name a president-elect, Congress must appoint an interim president until new elections are held. A major issue may arise if López Obrador refuses to acknowledge the Tribunal’s judicial authority. He recently alleged that the seven magistrates of the Federal Tribunal had received bribes from the PAN. However, López Obrador’s frequent sensational allegations are not always supported by reliable external evidence. This has tarnished his image as a responsible political leader. Additionally, his initial broad base of support has somewhat eroded, which can readily be seen by the diminished number of demonstrators present in the streets of Mexico City.

Furthermore, the loss of many of his more moderate supporters has radicalized AMLO’s campaign. Some of his militant followers have made it clear that they will resort to arms in a struggle to overthrow Calderón, if he is seated. Some fear that the present electoral melee could lead to outright civil war. This scenario is hardly conceivable for López Obrador, who would not be able to count on the Mexican Army’s support, making it all but impossible for him to take power through extra-legal means. As Sergio Sarmiento, a well-known Mexican columnist pointed out, at a recent Center for Strategic and International Studies conference, if AMLO attempts fail, he will not hesitate to make everybody else’s life miserable for the next six years.

In addition, AMLO’s spirited strategy is diminishing some his support within the PRD. Some prominent members have already distanced themselves from his movement, among these, is Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, the founder of the PRD who was robbed of the presidency in the 1988 presidential elections. He recently urged López Obrador to abide by the tribunal’s decision, whatever it may be. Some PRD members have raised doubts over AMLO’s continued stubbornness over the matter; others are questioning whether his actions have compromised PRD’s future prospects in the 2012 presidential race, if the Tribunal decides against him. With AMLO’s refusal to accept defeat, even if it is backed by an overwhelming amount of proof that in fact, Calderon has edged him over; the time may have arrived for him to rethink his strategy in this increasingly dangerous and polarized environment. If not, he risks losing important allies now and conceivably in the next presidential race.

Illustrative of how every year the Mexican electorate may be split, August 20, state elections in Chiapas attracted Mexico’s attention in a razor-thin competition between PRD candidate Juan Sabines and his PRI rival José Antonio Aguilar Bodegas. According to the preliminary count - which covered 94.3 percent of the polling stations- Sabines came out only 0.22 percent (or 2,405 votes) ahead of Bodegas. Aguilar Bodegas, following AMLO’s example, has refused to accept defeat, arguing that the TEPJF has not counted returns from polling stations where anomalies had been reported. Even, at that point, it is hard to predict what will be AMLO’s next move. The recent balloting in Chiapas will certainly not weaken AMLO’s commitment to a full recount of the electoral votes.

In a recently given interview with German journalists, President Vicente Fox made an unexpected statement referring to Felipe Calderón as the next president of Mexico. This premature assertion, although aimed at down-playing López Obrador’s persistent protests over the vote count, further revived AMLO’s otherwise flagging campaign. Fox’s decision to declare Calderón the winner exemplifies his possibly over-exaggerated confidence in the way the upcoming TEPJF decision -that will be officially released on September 6- will go. It should be mentioned that the announcement was not specifically directed at a Mexican audience. It is also possible that Fox’s words have unintentionally revealed his own uncertainties concerning the Court’s final conclusion. Nevertheless, until TEPJF officially releases its decision, it is certain that Mexico’s two main political protagonists will continue to pepper the Mexican media with a highly symbolic “war of words,” comprised of somewhat boastful and self-serving declarations.

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Magali Devic.

The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being “one of the nation’s most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers.” For more information, please see our web page at www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202) 223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email coha@coha.org.

[Back to Main Page]