THINKING OF CUBA:
                                 =================


                                  A COLLECTION OF
                                  ===============


                       SHORT ESSAYS ON CASTRO'S DICTATORSHIP
                       =====================================


                                AND LATIN AMERICA.
                                ==================







                                 Jorge Luis Romeu



                                   Syracuse, NY


                                    May of 1992



                                  Copyright 2000

                                                                Page 2


                                         .







                         To the Cuban Internal Dissidents:


                        Who Would Like to Say These Things


                    And Then Go On With Their Lives in Dignity.





                        With the Hope This Book Contributes



                                  to Achieving It



                                       SOON.

                                                                Page 3


                                     Prologue.
                                     =========

             Often, American political analysts look at events south of the
        Rio  Grande.   And  then,  propose approaches and/or solutions they
        would  not  implement  in   the   United   States   under   similar
        circumstances.   For example, many political analists from the left
        accept the dictatorship of Fidel  Castro  on  the  grounds  that  a
        minimum  standard  of  living  is provided to the poor.  Similarly,
        many right wing analysts accepted Pinochet's dictatorship,  for  it
        guaranteed peace and stability to the business sectors.

             However, not many  of  these  same  analysts  are  willing  to
        propose   a   communist  dictatorship  in  the  United  States,  to
        erradicate, say the poverty and social ills  in  Harlem,  Bronx  or
        Newark.   Nor they are willing to accept a military dictatorship to
        re-establish law and order and erradicate the drug problems of, say
        downtown Washington, DC.

             Some political analysts also accept the crumbling of communism
        in the Eastern Block -but persist in justifying this same system in
        the Third World, in Latin America and in Cuba.  And, consciously or
        unconsciously,  there  is a great dosis of ethnocentrism and racism
        in their political position.  What other explanation can  there  be
        if  one  system  is  not  acceptable  for  europeans but is readily
        acceptable for other ethnias in other continents?

             The lack  of  consistency  and  reciprocity  inherent  in  the
        ethnocentric  political  attitudes  of these writers is then passed
        on, to the American public at large.  And this does not  contribute
        to  a better understanding or healthy political relations among the
        U.S.  and Third World countries, Latin America in particular.

             This book presents collection of 28 short essays on  Cuba  and
        Latin  America.   They  are part of a series that first appeared in
        The Syracuse Post Standard and  The  Herald  American,  during  the
        years  1988  to  1992.   The  articles are reproduced as originally
        submitted  to  these  publications.   Many  of  them   were   later
        translated  and  published  in  the  Spanish Miami Herald (El Nuevo
        Herald) and other publications.

             These 28 short essays present the English speaking reader with
        an  alternative  viewpoint  of  the political scene, South of their
        border.  Its author is an Associate Professor of Statistics at  the
        State  University of New York College at Cortland.  He was born and
        raised in Cuba, and studied and worked under Castro until 1980.  He
        has already published two other short story books in Spanish, under
        the pen name "Beltran de Quiros".

             No political event can be failry assessed out of its  context.
        For  this reason, this collection includes articles that relate the
        Cuban political situation with that of Latin America, to which Cuba
        is  an  integral  part of.  Moreover, these articles cover the five
        year period during which both, Latin  America  and  Eastern  Europe
        (except  Cuba)  moved  toward more pluralistic forms of government.

                                                                Page 4


        Hence, the reader can also  obtain  a  global  view  of  how  these
        political events were interrelated and affected each other.

             The twenty eight articles were  selected  from  three  topics,
        then  grouped  into  them.   The  first four articles discuss human
        rights violations in Cuba.  The twelve following articles deal with
        international  political events such as the fall of the Paraguayan,
        Chilean, Panamanian and Nicaraguan dictatorships.  We compare  them
        to  similar  ones  in  Eastern  Europe,  Asia  and Africa.  We also
        discuss  the  electoral  processes  in  Peru,  Mexico,   Venezuela,
        Colombia,  Costa  Rica and Chile, among others, and compare them to
        those in the U.S., Europe and Cuba.

             The last twelve  articles  deal  with  the  current  political
        situation  in  Cuba.  In them, the firm negative of Fidel Castro to
        make the  smallest  concesion  to  open  up  the  Cuban  system  is
        contrasted  with  the  opposite  trends  in vogue around the world,
        including Cuba's former ally the Soviet Union.  And we discuss  the
        internal and external problems and forces engaged in the pursuit of
        democracy and pluralism in Cuba.

             We hope these readings contribute to a better understanding of
        the  fact  that  we,  Latin Americans, are just like the Americans,
        Europeans or any other -and not the paternalistic stereotypes  some
        like  to  portray  or  imagine.   And that we strive for individual
        freedoms and dignity just like any other human being.  Or  possibly
        more, precisely because we don't have so many other things!

                                                                Page 5


                                 Commented Index:
                                 ================



             1) Writing in Exile (Post Standard).  Reasons for and power of
        writing  activity  among  political  exiles.  In a war of ideas, as
        political struggles are or should be, the trench is  the  newspaper
        and  the weapon is the typewritter.  Then, let the best system win.
        Page 9.

             2) Solitude of Political Exile (Herald American).   The  first
        of the series.  Discusses lack of religious freedom in Cuba and its
        consequences:  the creation of the survivor or political hypocrite,
        who must conceal his/her true philosophical conceptions in order to
        survive.  Page 12.

             3) The  Last  Cuban  Political  Prisoners  (Herald  American).
        Illustrates  the  situation of political prisoners and prisoners of
        conscience in  Cuban  jails,  and  the  consequences  of  having  a
        political  prisoner  in  one's  own  family vis-a-vis political and
        social pressures and daily life.  Page 16.

             4) Human Rights Monitoring (American  Statistical  Association
        H.R.   Newsletter).   The  work  of  human  rights  groups is often
        arduous.  For often, much time and effort is expended  without  any
        apparent   results.    Examples  to  the  contrary,  in  Cuba,  are
        presented.  Page 19.

             5) Political Trends in Latin America (Herald American).  Draws
        a  parallel  between  the  American  election  of 1988 and those in
        Colombia and Venezuela, the similarities between the political life
        in  Latin  and  Anglo American countries.  Some conditions may well
        differ but the bottom line desire and goals are the same.  Page 23.

             6) Paraguay and Panama (The Post Standard).  Are  all  similar
        elections the same?  The electoral processes taking place in Panama
        and Paraguay are analyzed and the differences and similarities  are
        brought  out.   The possible consequences of failing either of them
        are discussed.  Page 27.

             7) Three Power  Struggles  (Post  Standard).   The  events  in
        Poland  (Solidarity's  access  to  power),  in  Iran  (the death of
        Ayatollah Khomeini) and in China (Tianamen's square)  are  compared
        and  some conclusions regarding dictatorship regimes in general are
        drawn.  Page 30.

             8) Three Questions (Herald American).  Written just before the
        Nicaraguan election, this short piece underlines how the Nicaraguan
        case has been singled out by  partisan  politics,  while  the  same
        support for, and actions in favor of other dictatorial regimes have
        been ignored or have been minimized.  Page 33.

                                                                Page 6


             9) What Now for Nicaragua (Post Standard).   Analysis  of  the
        results   of   the  Nicaraguan  elections,  its  possible  origins,
        consequences and  other  side  effects  for  the  Central  American
        region.  Page 35.

             10) Vargas Llosa:  Making History  in  Peru  (Post  Standard).
        Analysis  of  the  political  climate  and  campaing  during Peru's
        presidential elections.  Positive and negative points of  candidate
        Mario Vargas Llosa and a short outline of his carreer.  Page 39.

             11) March Toward Pluralism (Post Standard).  Account  of  how,
        during  the decade of the eighties, the Latin American subcontinent
        has moved from a set of largely  military  governments  to  one  of
        pluralistic democracies.  Examples are given.  Page 43.

             12) Bush's Americas Initiative (Post Standard).  Bush's recent
        trip  to six Latin American countries, its origins and consequences
        for,  both,  the  U.S.   and  the   subcontinent,   are   analyzed.
        Advantages  of such a policy, under the uncertain new order that is
        rising after the events in Eastern Europe are underlined.  Page 47.

             13) Mexican-American Trade  Agreement  (Post  Standard).   The
        recently  proposed  trade agreement between Mexico and the U.S., to
        create the  North  American  free-trade  region,  with  Canada,  is
        analyzed.   Pros  and  cons  of  implementing  or discarding such a
        treatise, are discussed under the light of current world-wide trend
        towards creating big economic blocks.  Page 50.

             14) No Mexican  Siesta  (Post  Standard).   Impressions  of  a
        recent  trip  to  Mexico  City and surrounding areas:  the place is
        literally bursting with street vendors,  small  shops,  independent
        taxis  and  micro-buses.   In  spite of their problems (earthquake,
        pollution  and  inflation)  Mexicans  are  moving  swiftly   toward
        political and economic renewal.  Page 54.

             15)  Christopher  Columbus  (Post  Standard).   Quincentennial
        Aniversary  of Columbus has different meanings to different people:
        American  indians,  blacks,  europeans,  etc.    The   causes   and
        consequences of this event to these different groups, especially in
        Latin America, are analyzed and the alternatives  to  Columbus  are
        overviewed.  Page 58.

             16) The  Chilean  Referendum:   We  and  It  (Post  Standard).
        Discusses   the   similarities  between  the  Chilean  (Pinochet's)
        dictatorship and the Cuban  (Castro's)  one.   It  points  out  the
        inconsistency and lack of reciprocity in the political positions of
        those who support one of them and condemn the other, irrelevant  of
        which this one is.  Page 61.

             17) A Cuban Referendum (Post Standard).  Discusses the  letter
        of Cuban and European intellectuals to Fidel Castro, demanding that
        he implements a national referendum in Cuba just  as  Pinochet  has
        done  in  Chile,  and that Castro returns the country to pluralism.
        Page 64.

                                                                Page 7


             18) Bilan:  30 Years of Castro (Herald  American).   Discusses
        the  achievements  and failures of 30 years of marxist dictatorship
        under Castro, in Cuba, and illustrates with examples the effects of
        lack of freedom on people's behavior.  Page 67.

             19) El Super:  Cuban Film Outside  Cuba  (Post  Standard).   A
        review of the Cuban-American film of the same name with an in-depth
        look into the soul of its main Cuban characters, their  motivations
        and the nightmare of life in political exile.  Page 72.

             20) Havana:  Film and  Story  (Post  Standard).   Counterpoint
        style,  performs  a parallel between the way Havana and the Batista
        regime were and meant, to those who lived it, as opposed to the way
        it  is  portrayed  in  Hollywood  films.   Generalization  of  such
        Hollywood tendency to stereotype Latin American countries  and  its
        effects to Hispanics in the U.S.  Page 75.

             21) Mariel:  the Cuban Dunkerke (Post Standard).   An  account
        of  the  Mariel  boatlift,  that brought over 120,000 cubans to the
        United States in two months.  Its causes, how it developed and some
        consequences for the tenth anniversary of this event.  Page 78.

             22) Multirracial Society  (Post  Standard).   In  the  seventy
        years  elapsed,  since  the  abolition  of slavery in Cuba (1880 to
        1950) much terrain was gained in achieving a multirracial  society.
        By  comparison  many  other lagged behind Cuba in social and racial
        equality.   The  Cuban  interracial  situation  in  the  1950's  is
        presented.  Page 81.

             23) Our Man in Havana (Post Standard).  Discusses  the  visit,
        to Cuba, of Soviet leader Mihail Gorbachev.  Motives and objectives
        of Gorbachev's visit are contrasted with the stubborn orthodoxy  of
        the Cuban dictator.  Page 84.

             24) The Tip of the Iceberg (Post Standard).  In-depth analysis
        of  the  execution  of  Cuban  general  and war hero Arnaldo Ochoa.
        Possible causes for his execution and some consequences in the near
        future for Castro's regime are discussed.  Page 87.

             25) Bay of Pigs:   30  Years  of  Reckoning  (Post  Standard).
        Summary  account of the Bay of Pigs and the air raids that preceded
        it, from the point of view of a contemporary witness.  An  analysis
        of the causes that originated this invasion and of some reasons for
        its failure is performed.  Page 91.

             26)  Aftermath:   An  Opportunity  in  Cuba  (Post  Standard).
        Analysis of the Cuban situation at the end of 1990, under the light
        of  perestroika,  the  fall  of  the   Eastern   European   marxist
        dictatorships  and the work of the different political exile groups
        in their quest for the restauration of  pluralism  in  the  island.
        Page 94.

             27) A Cuban Democratic Surprise?  (Post Standard).  The recent
        Cuban  communist  party  congress was a lost opportunity, for Fidel
        Castro, to give a step toward pluralism and facilitate  a  peaceful

                                                                Page 8


        transition.   Current  Cuban  internal  and external dissidence and
        their links are analyzed.  Page 98.

             28) Post Castrism  is  Here!   (Post  Standard).   The  recent
        failed  coup  in  the Soviet Union has alienated from power the few
        Stalinist friends the Castro government still  had  in  the  world.
        Without  the  Soviet economic and military aid, Castro's chances of
        survival are scarce.  An analysis of the factors that could conduce
        to pluralism in Cuba is undertaken.  Page 102.

             Epilogue.  Page 106.

Writing in Exile.                                               Page 9
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                 Writing in Exile.
                                 =================

                              Passtime, Profession or
                              =======================


                                 Pluralistic Tool?
                                 =================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O. Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post Standard.


                             Date: January 16th, 1990.



                          Published: January 31st, 1990.

Writing in Exile.                                              Page 10
J. L. Romeu


             Writing and publishing is  fun!   And  if  we  brouse  through
        writers  guides or how-to books we find three very good reasons for
        it:  money, fame and the sharing of ideas.  But for some of us  who
        come  from  far  away and oppressed nations, where there is no free
        press, there is still an additional and  very  significant  reason.
        Writing  provides us with a tool to fulfill our commitment to those
        left behind, thus giving meaning to our political exile.

             Every time one of us has the opportunity to publish  a  piece,
        sharing   with  you  some  of  our  experiences  about  life  under
        totalitarianism -any totalitarianism- and you take the  trouble  of
        reading it, we are scoring a point in our long struggle towards the
        restauration of pluralism in our country of origin.   And  this  is
        so,  not because we, the ostracised, may have a monopoly over truth
        -which we certainly don't- nor because we  may  be  members  of  an
        extraordinary  breed  -which  we certainly aren't.  Simply, because
        every time one of us  manages  to  get  our  message  of  pluralism
        through, those totalitarian governments we combat realize they have
        made a political mistake, by throwing us out or letting us go.

             To fully understand the nature of this situation I offer you a
        concrete  example:   that  of  my  native  Cuba.   It is necessary,
        however,  to  understand  how  Castro  deals  with   the   internal
        opposition  to  his  regime.   For  the duration of his 30 years in
        power Castro has encouraged and/or forced  those  opposing  him  to
        leave  Cuba,  based  on  the  old  Spanish saying:  "build a silver
        bridge for the enemy who flees!".  At regular intervals, from  1960
        to  1962, from 1965 to 1970 and from 1979 to 1980, Castro allowed a
        selection of discontent citizens -a million all  together,  10%  of
        the  country's  population- to leave Cuba.  And through this scheme
        Castro has gained a temporary respite  in  the  internal  political
        situation  which  has  allowed  him to regain control and remain in
        power.

             In addition, Castro has partially financed many  Cuban  social
        programs  (housing,  schooling,  full  employment) with the houses,
        money and positions left behind by the exiles and taken over by the
        Cuban government.

             Castro has paid a minimal price for this policy of giving away
        much  of  the best and brightest of Cuba's management, professional
        and technical classes.  It may be true that Cuba  is  bankrupt  and
        its  citizens  stand in long lines for the most essential things of
        life.  As far as Castro is concerned, he is still in power.

             Totalitarian doctrines use its control of media and people  to
        exhibit  its  positive  points  and  conceal  its  flaws.   This is
        propaganda.  One of Castro's most important functions, as a  client
        state  of  the  Soviet  Union,  is to function as a PR operation of
        communism in Latin  America.   By  exposing  his  regime  with  our
        articles  and  talks,  we  can  hit  him  where  it hurts most:  by
        damaging the interest of his soviet underwriters.

Writing in Exile.                                              Page 11
J. L. Romeu


             With the recent events in Eastern Europe,  the  fallacy  about
        the  large popular support Castro's government enjoys because there
        is  no  internal  opposition,  crumbles.   Look  to  Cuba's  sister
        communist   countries,   DDR,   Chekoslovakia,  Hungary,  Bulgaria,
        Rumania.  As in Cuba today, these countries  were  untill  recently
        apparently   supporting   their  totalitarian  regimes.   Given  an
        opportunity, they have revolted and executed or jailed  their  most
        staunch  and cruel leaders, like Ceaucescu and Honecker, or retired
        those more amenable to allow an evolution, like Yates or Yivkov.

             Hence, when we publish or talk about oppression in our  county
        of  origin, and make waves abroad, the cost-benefit of expatriating
        the opposition has to be recalculated.  We consciously want to make
        expensive  for  Castro  his  policy  of exporting dissidents.  For,
        inside the country, even when muffled  and  persecuted,  opposition
        groups  can organize, as Solidarity and Civic Forum have done.  And
        then, better things will come.  It was the result of many years  of
        hard  work  from  opposition organizations, and not the goodness of
        the  hearts  of  hard-core  stalinists  like  Honecker,  Yivkov  or
        Ceaucescu,  that  triggered  the  East  European  evolution towards
        pluralism.

             This, in a nutshell, is why we write.  And if,  in  however  a
        modest  but  consistent  manner,  our  writings  contribute towards
        regaining pluralism, then every effort and resources we put into it
        is well spent.

Solitude                                                       Page 12
J.L.Romeu


                                         .









                           Solitude of Political Exile.
                           ============================



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu

                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203
                                  (315) 476-8994



                           Submitted to Syracuse Herald

                                 April 8th, 1988.



                       Published: Sunday, April 10th, 1988.

Solitude                                                       Page 13
J.L.Romeu


             I was putting away my guitar and my music, just  after  Sunday
        Mass,   when  my  eyes  caught  the  article  headline:   Cuba  and
        Christianity.  I started reading it avidly.  It was like  reopening
        an old trunk, up in the attic, and pulling out all the memorabilia.

             I was back again in mid-1960, the second  year  of  the  Cuban
        revolution.   Batista,  our  former dictator, had brought down with
        him  the  whole  political  structure   of   the   Republic.    The
        Constitution  of  1940  was  now  suspended,  all political parties
        (except the Socialist) disbanded, the old armed forces  and  police
        substituted  by  the newly created militias.  Newspapers, radio and
        TV stations were now either controlled  by  the  government  or  in
        government hands.  Socialism, a word which had never been mentioned
        during the struggle against Batista, was now constantly repeated in
        the  state-controlled  media.   Communist  Party members, including
        those having served in  Batista's  1940-1942  cabinet,like  current
        Cuban  Vice  President  Carlos  Rafael  Rodriguez,  were  now being
        quietly appointed to key positions.

             One of the few independent organizations  still  in  place  in
        1960  was  the  Catholic  Church.   Since our independence in 1902,
        state and church were separated.  However, according  to  the  1953
        census,  over  80%  of  the Cubans freely declared themselves Roman
        Catholics.   Throughout  the  country,  Catholic  lay  organization
        Accion  Catolica,  with  its  three youth branches, Catholic Youth,
        Catholic Students and Catholic Workers still had offices open  with
        thousands  of  members.   It was obvious that the Catholic movement
        had to be broken if the communists were to obtain  and  secure  the
        power in Cuba.  And they did!

             I started high school in the Fall of 1960, the  last  year  of
        catholic  school  system.  Like all other private schools, it would
        be taken over by the government in the spring of  1961.   A  fierce
        struggle   for   the   control   of   student   organizations   was
        simultaneously taking place  between  pro-government  and  catholic
        factions.   As  a  result, hundreds of students and professors were
        expelled, leaving the schools in  the  hands  of  a  pro-government
        watch-dog  group  and  a  population  of  terrorized  students  and
        faculty, trying to ride the wave.

             In 1962, I was working  with  a  Catholic  Youth  group.   Our
        formal   organization   was  already  officially  disbanded.   This
        occurred after Mons.  Boza Masvidal, auxiliary  Bishop  of  Havana,
        was  forced  at the point of a gun into a ship in the harbor.  Boza
        was Pastor of the Parish of La  Caridad,  in  one  of  the  poorest
        neighborhoods  of old Havana.  He was deported, along with hundreds
        of other priests and nuns.   He  had  to  be  sent  away.   He  was
        inmensly   popular  among  students  and  the  people.   After  his
        eviction, old Mons.  Diaz, who  celebrated  Mass  at  the  Congreso
        Catolico  Nacional  in  Havana, in December 1960, before a crowd of
        over a million people, steered the church as best he could.   After
        him,   caretakers   have   carried   on   with  the  administrative
        work,honestly convinced that it is wiser to keep  an  empty  church
        open than to have no church at all.

Solitude                                                       Page 14
J.L.Romeu


             After that, it was free fall.  Complete  political  compliance
        was  to  be  obtained  at  all  costs.   Fierce  mass expulsions of
        university  students,  mostly   catholics,   were   re-enacted   in
        1963-1965.   Finally,  we  hit  the  all-time  low in 1966 with the
        creation of the infamous UMAP labor camps, which were going to  put
        an end to the resistance to the government marxist policies.

             In 1966 I was in the UMAP with more than  30,000  other  young
        Cubans  of  all  races,  religions, parts of the country and social
        strata.   This  selected  group  included  the  students  from  the
        Catholic  Seminary  and dozens of Protestant ministers and Catholic
        priests, as well as thousands of high school and college  students,
        and  young  peasants and workers.  Never was there a protest in our
        behalf from  our  Bishops,  nor  from  the  Ecumenical  Council  of
        Churches.   Nor from anybody else within the country.  Everyone was
        terrified in those days.

             In UMAP camps we learned to withstand and overcome  long  days
        of  hard  labor in the cane fields, ill fed and constantly reminded
        that we  were  the  scum  of  the  country  and  would  suffer  our
        punishment  until  repentance  and  compliance.  We learned to deal
        with  pain,  hunger,  sickness  and  fear  -and   humiliation   and
        loneliness.

             In the fall of 1966, the US.  Delegation to the United Nations
        presented photographic material on the UMAP camps.  After brief and
        useless denial, the Cuban government was forced to acknowledge  and
        modify our deplorable conditions in the Labor Camps.  Work week was
        reduced to six days and the work day  to  twelve  hours.   We  were
        allowed  the  first visits of our families.  And the dismantling of
        UMAP, which took two long years,  started  slowly,  thanks  to  the
        international clamor against it.

             When I left the UMAP camps, in  the  summer  of  1968,  I  was
        determined to get an education and a position from which to help my
        people.   Careers  available  at  the   time   for   non-government
        supporters  were  limited  to low profile jobs in pure sciences and
        agriculture.  Medicine, journalism,  education,  engineering,  were
        reserved  for  progovernment students.  I re-entered the university
        and registered for math.  When I had to declare my religion on  the
        forms I started writing:  none.

             It is hard to swallow pride and  convictions  at  age  twenty.
        The  most  infamous  thing,  after  the disintegration of the Cuban
        family, that Fidel Castro has accomplished in 30 years in power  is
        to  force  so  many  of us to lie to survive.  We were left without
        leaders, without an active  organization  to  cling  to,  denied  a
        Cardinal  Vojtila  or a Mons.  Oscar Romero.  Is it any wonder that
        there are only 100,000 self avowed Christians in today's Cuba?

             Since then, we learned we will  always  be  loosers  in  their
        game,  because  the rules are fixed against us.  There is no way to
        reach any position of  relevance  because  unconditional  political
        allegiance  comes first and any other merits later.  We cannot even

Solitude                                                       Page 15
J.L.Romeu


        complain.  The  only  way  to  express  our  displeasure  with  the
        government  policies  is  to  leave  our country:  Cubans vote with
        their feet!  But of course, not everyone can leave.

             No, it is not because I cannot go back that  I  am  angry  but
        because,  in  order to be able to tell the story, I had to leave in
        the first place.  By expressing myself as a political  exile  I  am
        only  fulfilling  my  responsibility  to those left behind.  And, I
        trust, also to the ideals of freedom upon which the  United  States
        rests.

Cuban Political Prisoners                                      Page 16
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                       The "Last" Cuban Political Prisoners.
                       =====================================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu

                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203
                                  (315) 476-8994




                                        ________ ______

                           Submitted to Syracuse Herald


                                 June 13th, 1988.



                 Published: Sunday Opinion Section, June 19, 1988.

Cuban Political Prisoners                                      Page 17
Jorge Luis Romeu


             The thick gray concrete wall was  suddenly  interrupted  by  a
        cell door, completely covered with a steel plank.  The guard opened
        it.  Inside, on a small cot, was a pale-white,  thin  but  familiar
        figure.  In spite of the dim light -the only barred window had also
        been covered with a  steel  plank-  and  the  slow  door  squeak  I
        recognized  my  older  brother's  voice:  "What are you doing here!
        Something happened to the old lady?"

             We hadn't seen him in over a year.  We  hadn't  had  any  news
        from  him  or  he from us in all that time.  He was a "plantado", a
        "rooted one" in English.  He was a  "tapiado"  too,  which  loosely
        means   "cloistered   within".   These  group  of  Cuban  political
        prisoners, following the Geneva Convention Agreement  on  prisoners
        of conscience, had refused to receive indoctrination, do chain gang
        work or wear the blue  uniforms  of  the  common  convicts.   As  a
        reprisal,  they  were  first  kept  in  their underwear in isolated
        wards, without family visits or correspondence.  Then,  since  this
        treatment  did  not break them, they were transferred to the remote
        Boniato Prison and cloistered within their cells.  There, they were
        cut  off from the world and, in addition, were unable to go out and
        exercise, to take the sun, or even to communicate with one another.

             These are not words taken form Valladares'  testimonial  book,
        ______  ____  _________

        Contra  toda  Esperanza  or  from  Hilda Perera's fact-based novel,
        ________

        Plantado  which  describe  the  situation  of  Cuban  prisoners  of
        conscience.  This is what I actually saw, in the early 1970's, when
        I had the rare opportunity to visit my brother in "las Tapiadas" of
        Boniato  Prison.   Most of these men have already served their long
        sentences But the ones who haven't, are part of the  385  political
        prisoners  Castro  has  offered  to free, in a recent letter to New
        York's Cardinal O'Connor, and allow to emigrate to the US.

             Why were these men in prison in the first place?   These  were
        not  delinquents  but  ordinary citizens of all trades and walks of
        life, like you and me.  Many of them were  former  members  of  the
        revolutionary  movement that brought Fidel Castro to power in 1959,
        with dreams of pluralism and  national  renewal.   They  saw  their
        dreams go awry.  The rest revolted against Castro's government when
        they realized it was becoming  another  dictatorial  regime.   They
        have  all endured long prison terms, in a country where there is no
        sentence  reduction  unless  you   are   willing   to   submit   to
        indoctrination  and  forced  labor  and  where those refusing to do
        forced labor can be convicted, invoking the vagrancy laws, and kept
        indefinitely in jail.

             Why  has  Castro's  government  become  suddenly  compasionate
        towards  these  men,  when it never felt this urge in thirty years?
        Some say Cuba needs to improve it's public image  in  a  time  when
        even  General Pinochet in Chile is allowing the return of political
        exiles, the organization of political parties and  elections.   And
        when  Gorbachev  in  the Soviet Union is talking about openness and
        detente.  And because  Cuba  has  the  dubious  record  of  keeping
        political  prisoners  longer  in  jail  than  any  other  political
        prisoners the world.

Cuban Political Prisoners                                      Page 18
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Others say that there is a need, in Cuba, for another  "escape
        valve".   If  we  follow  Cuban  events under Castro, we notice how
        every few years (1965-1970 during the "Freedom Flights",  1979-1980
        during the "reunification flights" and later the "Mariel Boatlift")
        the government lets a  few  thousand  emigrate.   This  allows  the
        eviction  of  selected  opposition,  which  stabilizes the internal
        situation for a while...  until another "escape valve" is needed.

             Whatever the reason, it is good news to know  that  these  men
        will  be  able  to  leave  Cuba  with  their  families,  if  the US
        government receives th em.  But this is  where  the  gimmick  lies:
        only if the US is willing to receive these political prisoners will
        the Cuban Government release them.  If the US doesn't take them in,
        the  prisoners  won't  be  released  and  Uncle  Sam  and  not  the
        totalitarian regime in Havana, will be blamed for it.

             However, the release of these men does not solve the  ultimate
        problem  of the existance of Cuban political prisoners.  Only in an
        open society, where everyone is free to participate  and  there  is
        respect  for plurality, can this problem be eliminated.  As long as
        there is only One party, One media, One correct line of thought, it
        is very easy to fill up, again, the prisons with the men who do not
        bend to the will of those in power.

             Wouldn't it be easier for Fidel Castro to start,  as  proposed
        in  the  Central  American  President Oscar Arias' Plan, a national
        dialogue with all the  Cubans,  inside  and  outside  the  country?
        Would  Castro be willing, to allow the publication of an opposition
        newspaper in Havana, even with censorship and curtailed  supply  of
        paper, like La Prensa in Managua?  Would Castro be willing to allow
        in  Cuba,  as  Pinochet's  government  in  Chile  is   reluctanctly
        allowing,  the return of political exiles, the organization of free
        political  parties  and  of  free  and  internationally  supervised
        elections?

             And, if not, why  is  Castro's  government  less  inclined  to
        political evolution than the Chilean authoritarian dictator?  Or is
        it that, in a marxist totalitarian society, a  political  evolution
        can  only  happen under the preasure of armed guerrillas, like with
        the Contras in Nicaragua?

             Let's pray that the day will arrive when this is not so.

Human Rights Monitoring                                        Page 19
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                              Human Rights Monitoring

                              Does Make a Difference.


                                 Jorge Luis Romeu



                   Published: American Statistical Association.

                              Human Rights Newsletter


                                   April  1991.



                                    Final Copy

Human Rights Monitoring                                        Page 20
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Often we are asked by human rights groups to write letters  to
        foreign government officials, on behalf of people we don't know but
        who are experiencing serious problems.  And, being  extremely  busy
        in  a  society  that  moves fast and is quite demanding, we can ask
        ourselves whether our efforts will have any effect  or  whether  we
        might  better  employ  this  time  in  some other more positive and
        useful endeavor.

             This is a reasonable question and demands a  straight  forward
        and honest answer.  And the answer is simply:  yes!  our efforts do
        have an effect.  As a matter  of  fact  they  usually  have  a  big
        effect.  Let's explain.

             Those countries that engage in large human  rights  violations
        are usually not democracies, but rather totalitarian dictatorships.
        In addition, they are  usually  also  client  states  of  a  larger
        country  with  geopolitical interests that the client state has the
        obligation to further and protect.  Hence, when these human  rights
        violators  are confronted with measurable amounts of criticism from
        abroad, especially from prestigeous independent institutions as the
        asa,  the  aaas,  ai,  etc.   Or from profesionals as any of us is,
        these countries tend to provide a fix for the situation.   Only  to
        get  off  the  spotlight.   And through this fix, the individual(s)
        suffering these violations can  ameliorate  their  situations  and,
        even  in  some cases, completely solve their problems.  A practical
        example may better illustrate this.

             In the mid-sixties, I was a  freshman  mechanical  engineering
        student  in  the  university  of  Havana,  Cuba, at a time when the
        government of Fidel  Castro  was  completing  the  buildup  of  its
        totalitarian  state.   To  this  effect,  large faculty and student
        purges (e.g.  Mass explusions) were implemented, to force  absolute
        compliance with government political line of thought.  And, jointly
        with other potential student leaders and an avowed non marxists,  I
        was  expelled,  with  a  special request to be sent to the military
        service.  The formal acusation  for  this  severe  measure  was  my
        (justified   medical)   abscence   to   the   student   "voluntary"
        agricultural work.

             Mine was not  an  isolated  case;  we  were  expelled  by  the
        hundreds  during  that  schoolyear, and many others were simply not
        allowed to register for their following semester.

             These mass  expulsions  continued  until  Unesco  flatly  told
        Castro's  government,  in 1966, that it would suspend the moneys it
        was providing the university to expand and  modernize  its  campus,
        unless such situation drastically changed.  Unesco had been lobbied
        and  approached   by   several   professional   organizations   and
        individuals,  denouncing  this  situation.   Under  such  pressure,
        Castro was forced to stop student expulsions.  Non marxist students
        continued  having  large  problems  to study in Cuba.  Many careers
        like  medicine,  education,  journalism,  political   science   and
        engineering  were  totally  closed for us.  But, once we managed to
        register in one  of  the  others,  we  stood  a  larger  chance  of

Human Rights Monitoring                                        Page 21
Jorge Luis Romeu


        completing the curriculum and graduating.

             Another example is provided by the suite of events  after  our
        mass  expulsions  from  the  University of Havana.  Many of us, who
        were sent to the  military  service  ended  up  in  the  Umap,  the
        military labor camps that existed in the Cuban province of Camaguey
        from 1966 to 1968.  There, we worked 14 hours a day, seven  days  a
        week  cutting, planting and caring for sugar cane crops.  No family
        visits were allowed; no passes were granted.  Letters  were  highly
        scrutinized  and  seldom  permitted.   No  one in Cuba, dared raise
        their voice to protest to the government about  these  labor  camps
        that had over thirty thousand young Cubans in them!

             Again, in the United  Nations,  voices  of  denonciation  were
        raised  and  our situation changed.  In September of 1966, the U.S.
        Delegate raised the  issue  in  the  general  meeting,  and  showed
        photographs  of  the labor camps and the shameful state in which we
        were kept.  There was no room for the Cuban  delegate  to  deny  or
        divert  the  issue.   Shortly  after,  we  had  our first pass, the
        following month we were given permission to go  home  for  a  week.
        And  the  Umap  labor  camps started its dismantling process -which
        took two long years.  Again, international pressure had forced  the
        cuban  government  to  comply  with  elementary human rights it was
        violating.

             Recently, our human rights committee  has  requested  help  in
        favor  of  two  Cuban  mathematics  students:  Quintana and Ortega.
        These two college students dared  to  write  a  letter  to  Castro,
        requesting  free  elections and a democratization process, in Cuba,
        similar to those recently undertaken in Eastern Europe.   For  this
        crime,  the  security  forces  put them under arrest and a judicial
        process followed.

             Much international scrutiny is currently on  Cuban  situation,
        since Castro has refused in-as-much as token opening or perestroika
        in this Caribbean island.  Many organizations and  individuals  did
        write to Castro and the Cuban authorities and many newspapers amply
        covered and discussed his negative around the  workd.   Two  months
        ago,  these two students were released and given "home arrest", for
        something that anywhere in the  world  would  not  have  been  even
        considered  a  fault  (Quintana,  since then, has been arrested and
        sent to a labor camp).  However, ten or  fifteen  years  ago,  this
        same situation would have passed unnoticed in the outside world and
        Quintana and Ortega, like  so  many  thousand  Cubans,  would  have
        served  a long jail sentence and could completely forget about ever
        again studying in college.

             Maybe, next time someone in a human rights  committe,  of  the
        ASA  or  somewhere else, requests from us that we write a letter in
        favor of a colleague in trouble somewhere else.   And  we  hesitate
        because  have  a  paper to review, or to complete for submission, a
        class to prepare, a report to write or a homework to  grade.   This
        is a proper time to remember some of these examples.

Human Rights Monitoring                                        Page 22
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Maybe the half hour we spend writing our letter may mean  that
        our  colleague in trouble eventually gets to grade a paper or write
        a report, one day, or get back to grading and producing, again,  at
        all.

Latin American Politics                                        Page 23
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                  Political Trends in the U.S. and Latin America:
                  ===============================================

                             Are they THAT different?
                             ========================







                                 Jorge Luis Romeu



                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203
                                  (315) 476-8994





                                          ________ ______

                         Submitted to the Syracuse Herald


                               November 27nd, 1988.


                          Published: December 4th. 1988.

Latin American Politics                                        Page 24
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Unconsciously, I overheard the middle aged couple standing  in
        line behind me:

             "What should we finally do, dear?  We vote for a new course or
        for keeping the old one?"

             "There are many things I'd like to see changed...  Still, many
        others I'd like to keep the same..."

             This brought to my mind a commentary  I  had  read  about  the
        American   electorate.   The  pundits  distinguished  three  voting
        trends:  those who wanted to keep things the same way for four more
        years;  others  who found things not well at all and wanted drastic
        changes; and a majoritary group who found that  some  changes  were
        rightly  due, but didn't want to throw out the baby with the water.
        Thus, the conservative, radical and moderate representatives, in  a
        pluralistic system, would sit together, negotiate their differences
        and, through  consensus,  would  govern  the  country.   And,  most
        important  of  all,  if  one  course  of  action went wrong, became
        unpopular or needed adjustment, a change would be sure  and  swift.
        Feedback  and  readjustment constitutes the secret of the stability
        of  the  American  system,  which  has  created  its   wealth   and
        prosperity.

             And I started wondering:   aren't  these  same  three  trends,
        conservative,  moderate  and radical also present in Latin American
        politics?  Or anywhere else, for that  matter?   It  is  true  that
        third  world  countries  are poorer than the U.S.  But, is economic
        wealth and industrial  development  a  necessary  condition  for  a
        nation  to  have  intelligent  citizens  and  capable leaders?  Was
        pluralistic democracy, in the United States,  achieved  after  this
        nation  became  a world industrial power?  Or wasn't it, precisely,
        its pluralistic political and economic system which made  the  U.S.
        a world economic power?

             A quick look  at  the  history  of  Latin  America  shows  the
        existence  of  these  same  three trends.  What is also immediately
        evident is that not always have these three trends learned to  live
        together  and  share  power  in a consensus-based government.  And,
        more important, not always have the two extremes, the extreme right
        and  the extreme left, learned to readjust its course or relinquish
        power when its policies have failed or become unpopular.

             In Latin America, the authoritarian military dictatorships  of
        the   extreme   right   and  left  can  be  identified  with  ultra
        conservative and radical trends.  Neither of  these  two  has  ever
        shared  power  nor  peacefully  rectified their policies.  And both
        have always created a power elite which has  governed,  has  become
        corrupt  and  has,  in the long run, been chased away or eventually
        will be.  In recent history we have seen examples of both  extremes
        with  the  Trujillos,  in  the  Dominican  Republic, the Somozas in
        Nicaragua and the Castros in Cuba.

Latin American Politics                                        Page 25
Jorge Luis Romeu


             There is a third, large, trend in  Latin  America  that  seeks
        social  and  economic  reform while maintaining order and political
        freedom:  the moderate center.  It is  the  only  one  identifiable
        with  pluralistic  democracy.   It  has had ample representation in
        contemporary history and the way it has appeared in latin  American
        countries says a lot about its characteristics.

             In 1948, Costa Rican journalist Jose Figueres,  organized  the
        opposition  and  overthrew  their authoritarian regime.  A socially
        minded pluralistic democracy,  pride  of  all  Latin  America,  was
        installed.   Figueres,  a  left-of-center  politician  was  elected
        President and a power-sharing, multi-party system has governed  the
        country  ever  since.   Liberals  and conservatives have rotated in
        government, adjusting each other's courses as needed.  In the midst
        of  the  Central  American  turmoil,  Costa  Rica  enjoys  freedom,
        stability, peace and international recognition.

             Venezuela constitutes another example.  Authoritarian  General
        Perez  Jimenez  was  ousted  in  1957  by  a  bloodless revolution.
        Novelist Romulo Betancourt was elected President at the head  of  a
        left-of-center   reformist   party.    Ever  since,  this  and  the
        right-of-center christian social party have  succeeded  each  other
        every five years, adjusting each other's course, too.  There are no
        political prisoners nor exiles in Venezuela and its  citizens  live
        and work in peace.

             Inspired by these examples, and following the  spirit  of  the
        1950's,  the  Cubans  overthrew authoritarian government of General
        Batista.  The Cuban revolution, like its counterparts in Costa Rica
        and  Venezuela,  sought  social  reform and a return to pluralistic
        democracy.  Fidel Castro betrayed  these  original  objectives  and
        installed, instead, an inflexible marxist dictatorship.

             For three years,  from  1959  until  1961,  Castro  lied  with
        complete  cynicism,  both,  to  the  Cuban people and to the entire
        world, stating he was not a communist and  that  the  Cuban  was  a
        nationalistic  revolution.   In  1961, Castro finally declared that
        Cuba was socialist.  The consequences of Castro's behavior went far
        beyond  the  Cuban  borders,  inflicting  an  irreparable damage to
        process of social reform  in  Latin  America.   Castro's  political
        duplicity  destroyed  the  candor  in  the  Latin  American  middle
        classes, substituting it for a mistrust and fear of  any  political
        change.   The  trend  towards pluralism and reform was reversed and
        the door for new right wing military  dictatorships  was  reopened.
        History will never acquit Castro of his responsibility in this!

             Not until the late 1970's do we see, again, a movement towards
        social  reform and pluralism in Latin America.  By then, the threat
        posed by the extreme left was felt  very  small  and  the  military
        governments   yielded  way  to  the  moderate  center.   Pluralism,
        government by consensus and rotation of parties  returned  to  many
        Latin American countries.

Latin American Politics                                        Page 26
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Today,  in  Central  America,  we  find   President   Duarte's
        Christian  Democrats,  in  El  Salvador,  waging  the middle ground
        between the  rightist  parties  and  the  leftist  guerrillas.   In
        Guatemala,  another  social christian party under President Vinicio
        Cerezo, is trying to steer the country towards social reform.  With
        all its problems, the pluralism installed by the moderates provides
        a long run alternative of peace and stability to the  region.   The
        extreme  right  or  the extreme left will only bring the inevitable
        civil war, followed by a one-party dictatorship imposed by whomever
        comes up the winner.

             The question, then, is:  should the  United  States  encourage
        and  aid  the  moderate  reformist governments that struggle, under
        hard  economic  and  political   circumstances,   for   pluralistic
        democracy?   Or  should  the  U.S.  turn its back and leave them to
        their own meager forces?

             In the mid 1960's, Venezuelan President Betancourt  confronted
        a  similar situation when Cuban supported guerrillas were trying to
        overthrow him.  With the support of several democratic governments,
        including the U.S., pluralism prevailed.  Had subversion succeeded,
        maybe Caracas would have followed the road of  Havana  and  Managua
        and free elections would not be taking place there this month.

             Democracy and pluralism certainly pay off!   For  the  country
        who  enjoys  it,  government by consensus and party rotation allows
        the peaceful participation  of  all  its  citizens,  stability  and
        economic  growth.   And  since no one political group needs to sell
        out the country to a foreign power, in order to rule over all other
        groups,  American  enemies  won't  use  these  countries  in  their
        geo-political plans against the U.S.

             And maybe there will be a better chance for Peace.

Paraguay and Panama                                            Page 27
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .





                               Paraguay and Panama:
                               ====================

                        Are all Similar Elections the Same?
                        ===================================




                                 Jorge Luis Romeu




                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203


                                  (315) 476-8994




                                       ___ _____________

                          Submitted to The Post-Standard

                                  May 8th, 1989.



                         Published: Friday May 12th, 1989.

Paraguay and Panama                                            Page 28
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Two apparently similar electoral  processes  have  just  taken
        place in Latin America last week:  one in Paraguay and the other in
        Panama.  However similar they may seem at first glimpse,  they  are
        radically different in more than one way.

             It is true that, both, Panama and Paraguay have suffered stern
        authoritarian  dictatorships  under  democratic  cover.  It is also
        true that, in both cases, the presidential candidate  supported  by
        the  government  has predictably been expected to win.  It is still
        true that both these two governments  were  compelled  to  organize
        elections  because of internal and international political pressure
        and economic problems -not their love for democracy.   And  finally
        that,  the  prime objective for conducting these elections has been
        to buy time.

             But here is where the similarities end.

             If we perceive elections as some sort of  inocuous  popularity
        contest  where  the  winner  takes  all  then  both  processes  are
        identical.  However, if we  believe  that  elections  are  complex,
        multi-stage processes with profound consequences, then we can point
        out the following radical differences between the two:

             In Paraguay, Stroessner's  regime  represented  a  stable  (34
        years)   political  system  with  a  powerful  and  well  organized
        political base:  the  Colorado  Party.   In  Panama,  by  contrast,
        General  Noriega  has  governed  for  less  than  a  decade with an
        heterogeneous group, more interested in short  term  material  gain
        than in long range political stay.

             In Paraguay, Stroessner was deposed by his own followers, when
        he  became a burden for the continuity of the system.  The Colorado
        Party is now rapidly trying to evolve in order to survive.  It  has
        apparently accepted the principle of power sharing in a pluralistic
        democracy and is now willing to give up its monopoly of  power  not
        to  loose  it  all  later  on.   The  opposition,  apparently,  has
        understood this change in attitude and is willing to play the  game
        to  take  the country back into the democratic path.  Between these
        two political forces they may achieve it, sparing  the  nation  the
        bloodbath  and  destruction  of an open power struggle.  Hence, the
        time  that  the  Paraguayan  election  is  currently   buying   is,
        hopefully,  the  necessary one to make the transition to a mutually
        agreed pluralistic democracy.

             In Panama, on the other hand, General Noriega doesn't seem  to
        care  much  about  the  opposition, its role nor a return to formal
        democracy.  A  shrewd  operator,  Gen.   Noriega  has  successfully
        wrapped  himself  in  the National flag, as so many other dictators
        conveniently do, to obtain some sort of legitimacy and support  for
        his  government.   The opposition, apparently over confident on the
        American support, hasn't been wise enough to  find  a  way  out  of
        government for him and his entourage.  Hence, each side seems to be
        using the electoral process to destroy the other.  And  the  futile
        time  they  are  currently buying may prove just enough until their

Paraguay and Panama                                            Page 29
Jorge Luis Romeu


        next inevitable clash.

             How can such a difference exist between  such  two  apparently
        similar processes?

             Maybe because Paraguayans have finally  understood  there  are
        three stages in an election, and Panamanians haven't.

             First, in an election the government recognizes the  existence
        of  alternative  power groups (the opposition) with valid interests
        and solutions to the national problems (their  platform).   Second,
        these  alternative groups are allowed to share their ideas with the
        nation as a whole (the political campaign).  Finally, the  election
        itself  permits  one  of  these  groups  to  take  charge under two
        conditions:  to hear and take into account what other  groups  have
        to say and to relinquish power after a finite period of time.

             This  political  reality,  which  in   our   days   has   been
        acknowledged  by  several  European  and  American governments, has
        apparently been accepted in Paraguay.

             In the 1970's, for example, in post Franco Spain as well as in
        post Salazar's Portugal, all political groups accepted pluralism to
        avoid civil war.   The  same  occurred  in  Brazil,  Argentina  and
        Uruguay  in  the  early  1980's.   And the same is currently taking
        place in Chile.

             At the other end  of  the  political  spectrum,  in  the  East
        European  countries,  we are starting to observe the same political
        behaviour.  In Poland, Solidarity has been legalized and allowed to
        present candidates in an open election.  And in Hungary, restricted
        political associations have  been  recently  allowed.   Apparently,
        what  wasn't  possible  for  Dubcek during the Spring of Prague, in
        1968, or for Imre Nagy, in Budapest in 1956, is  becoming  feasible
        today.

             Dictators from the right and from the left, General  Rodriguez
        of  Paraguay  and  General Jaruzelski from Poland, may have finally
        realized that, to function efficiently as a nation, the consent and
        contribution  of  all  its  citizens is required.  General Noriega,
        apparently, has failed to grasp this.

             Inadvertently amidst these noisy ones, a third Latin  American
        presidential  election has taken place this week, too.  In Bolivia,
        for second time since its return to pluralism in 1985, the citizens
        went to the polls to select a President in a three-way race:  left,
        center and right.

             There is Hope.  Time is working  for  democracy,  these  days.
        Let's pray for the best.

            _

Iran, China  Poland.                                           Page 30
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .



                              Three Power Struggles:
                              ======================

                            Should we loose our sleep,
                            ==========================

                                  or should they?
                                  ===============



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu

                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203



                                     ________ ______________

                        Submitted to Syracuse Post-Standard 

                                  June 7th, 1989.


                            Published: June 13th, 1989.

            _

Iran, China  Poland.                                           Page 31
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Three political events, largely  interrelated,  have  occurred
        around  the  world  this  weekend:   the  elections  in Poland, the
        student revolt in China and the  death  of  Ayatollah  Komeini,  in
        Iran.   If,  separetely, they are eloquent enough about the special
        characteristics of their respective countries, together  they  tell
        us a powerful story.

             In Poland, for the first time in forty years, a free  election
        has  taken  place.   A  legal  opposition  organization (Solidarity
        Union) was allowed to contest the  ruling  communist  party.   And,
        without  the  benefit  of  equal  media  time or space, without the
        contacts nor the skills that many years of legal operation  provide
        to  any political organization, Solidarity obtained over 80% of the
        popular vote.  By all counts, this is a resounding victory.

             As a  comparison,  just  a  few  months  ago  Chilean  General
        Pinochet lost his plebiscite when he received only 43% of the vote.
        Pinochet is now getting ready to leave.  So, besides being a strong
        indicative of the Polish people's desire for a drastic change, this
        bare 20% of the pro-communist popular vote could also be taken,  by
        the current Polish authorities, as an invitation to leave.

             The second event ocurred in  China.   There,  hundreds,  maybe
        thousands  of  college  students  have been massacred in the public
        square by government  troups,  for  demanding  political  freedoms.
        Born  and raised in a totalitarian society, these Chineese students
        put their lives on the line to claim their right to take their  own
        decisions.    They  did  not  want,  any  more,  the  Party  taking
        decissions for them in exchange for a guaranteed  minimum  standard
        of living.

             The last event was the death of Ayatollah Komeini, a religious
        leader  turned  politician, who was considered short of holy in his
        native Iran.   Followed  more  by  religeous  faith  and  emotional
        consideration  than  for  the  force  of  his  arguments, Komeini's
        dissappearence creates a large power vaccuum that has to be rapidly
        filled.   The  question remains which of the competing power groups
        will get it, and how.

             If we overlay these three stories, we obtain an  even  clearer
        picture of what these events are all about.

             The search for individual freedom is intrinsic  in  the  human
        being  and  only  second to the search for daily nourishment.  This
        has been demonstrated by Poland and China's events.  In both  these
        countries,   the   people   have  been  subjected,  for  years,  to
        "electoral" processes where 99% of the potential voters cast 99% of
        their  votes in support of the ruling party.  And now, when given a
        real free choice, the majority rejects its rule.

             Second, it is evident that economic reforms are not enough, if
        they  are  not accompanied by political reforms.  We have just seen
        that in China.  And that, when people are ready for reforms, either
        they  obtain  them  via  negotiations,  like in Poland, or via open

            _

Iran, China  Poland.                                           Page 32
Jorge Luis Romeu


        struggle, like in China.

             If Chineese authorities think they  can  drown  in  blood  the
        people's  quest  for  freedom  and  reforms,  let them just look to
        Hungary and Poland.  There, in 1956, the  Soviet  tanks  and  local
        communist  troops  silenced  with  bullets  the  people's  protest.
        Today, barely 30 years later, the same communist  governments  have
        been  forced  by  history  to undertake the most sweeping political
        reforms in all the Eastern Block.   Freedom  can  be  delayed,  but
        never forsaken.

             Chineese events also signal out that caution should be present
        when  dealing  with  totalitarian  societies.   Conservative  "hard
        liners" are reluctant to bring about change.  And, unlike  in  open
        western  societies, they are just waiting for the right occasion to
        regain power through internal reshufling.  Even  when  the  leaders
        are  honestly  in  favour of evolution, an abrupt internal struggle
        -like the present one in China- can turn around the trend any time.

             The death of the Ayatollah reminds us of the frailty of  human
        nature and of the greatest problem in a totalitarian society:  that
        of swift and peaceful succession.   Komeini  is  barely  gone;  the
        power struggle in Iran has just started, and heavens knows where it
        is going to lead them!

             These three political events are very thought provoking.  But,
        should they make us, or the totalitarian rulers of the world, loose
        sleep?

             For example, it would be no surprise if Fidel Castro, in Cuba,
        who  doesn't  want  to  have a Plebiscite for fear of obtaining the
        same results as the Polish just did, cannot sleep  very  well  this
        week.

             Castro, now 62, may fear  that,  within  his  own  government,
        there  may be some who think he will soon rejoin the Ayatollah.  In
        that case, a power struggle is likely  to  occur  among  the  three
        factions  that  support  the  government:   the old communists, the
        Sierra Maestra guerrillas and the socialist  generation  formed  in
        the last 30 years.  And, a similar situation to the one in Granada,
        in 1983, when Bishop was murdered in a power struggle, may arise.

             Already some,  in  Cuba,  may  be  seriously  considering  the
        possibility   of   retiring   Castro,  like  recently  occurred  to
        Stroessner.  And then, slowly,  opening  up  the  system,  like  in
        Poland,  towards power sharing with the opposition.  This course of
        action could avoid a bloody revolt, like the  one  in  China,  that
        would  open  the  door  for  an international intervention, like in
        Granada.

             Isn't that a really unsettling thought for an aging authocrat?

Three Questions                                                Page 33
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                               Three Questions About
                               =====================


                             the Nicaraguan Elections.
                             =========================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                 Syracuse, NY 1320




                                    Final Copy



                      Submitted to: Syracuse Herald American.


                            Date: February 20th, 1990.


                          Published: February 25th, 1990.

Three Questions                                                Page 34
J. L. Romeu


             There is much stereotyping regarding Latin America, both  from
        the  right  and  from the left This does not help the understanding
        nor the solving of Latin  American  problems.   As  a  result,  the
        extreme  right  often  supports  any  "strong  man"  who is able to
        maintain "order" and free enterprise.  And the  radical  left  does
        the  same  for any regime that enforces, in Latin America, the type
        of extreme social and economic measures they  would  never  sponsor
        here in the States.

             I propose three  direct  questions,  to  be  answered  in  the
        intimacy   of   our  own  conscience,  regarding  the  forthcomming
        Nicaraguan elections:

             i) Do you think the Sandinista government would have held free
        elections   if   the   Contras   hadn't  existed?   If  you  answer
        affirmatively, look to Cuba, the closest Sandinista supporter, ally
        and  role  model  in this Hemisphere, where free elections have not
        been held in 30 years, perhaps because the opposition has  no  real
        lever to bargain with the government.

             ii)  Last  year,  the  united  opposition  in  Chile  won  the
        elections against the 18-year old rule of General Pinochet.  During
        this  process  they  received  support  from   many   international
        organizations  and  governments,  including the Spanish government.
        And in  Poland,  Solidarity  also  receives  the  support  of  many
        international  organizations, in their struggle for pluralism.  The
        Nicaraguan opposition has been criticized  for  receiving  economic
        aid from the US.  However we may feel about the legality and wisdom
        of such widespread practices, what makes the Nicaraguan  opposition
        so  different  that  it  should  be  singled out over all the other
        cases?

             iii) The test for real Democracy is not so much  what  happens
        on   election   day,  as  what  happens  the  morning  after.   The
        possibility of carrying on with one's daily life,  even  after  our
        party has lost the elections, and of being able to openly pursue an
        opposition role until the next elections are held, is what  defines
        real  pluralism.  Think of your favorite US.  President, say Carter
        or Reagan.  And think how this blessed country would  be  different
        if  it  had  been  possible,  for  him to rule, uncontested, for 30
        consecutive years!

             Do we always apply consistently the Golden Rule?

The Morning After                                              Page 35
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                The Morning After:
                                ==================


                             What Now for Nicaragua?"
                             ========================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                          Submitted to: The Post Standard


                              Date: March 4th, 1990.


                            Published: March 16, 1990.

The Morning After                                              Page 36
J. L. Romeu


             Elections are over in Managua and, for the  surprise  of  most
        everyone, the Nicaraguan opposition coalition won by a margin of 55
        to 42.  We have to hand it to the  Nicaraguan  people!   They  made
        everyone, including the Sandinistas, believe the game was all over.
        And once in the privacy of the booth, they voted for change and for
        peace.

             We can quarrel about who actually  won,  and  argue  that  the
        Sandinistas are still the largest party in the country or that they
        lost by a margin as wide as that of the Chilean election.   Or,  if
        we  are  really interested in the peace process, we can join former
        president Carter in saying that "the only winners of this  election
        are the Nicaraguan people".

             But,  how  did  this  unexpected  result  occur?   And,   most
        important  yet, what happens next?  One explanation may be obtained
        with the following interpretation of the Central American events.

             The Contadora Peace Process of the early 80's failed, because,
        at  that  time,  the  Latin  American  governments involved felt no
        particular  need  to  press  negociations,  nor  had  anything   to
        negociate  with.   Then, the Contra Factor came into play providing
        two important side effects:  a strong stimulus for negociating  and
        a good bargaining tool.

             The Central American governments now realized that the  Contra
        Factor was rapidly converting their region into the battleground of
        a small scale US-Soviet geopolitical confrontation.  And also  that
        they better end this war quickly or the rest of the countries would
        be dragged into the devastating conflict, too.  In  addition,  they
        now  had something tangible to barter with:  the dismantling of the
        Contra forces.

             At this point, two unscheduled though favourable international
        events occurred.  In the Soviet Union, Gorbachev came to power with
        new proposals for arms reductions and detente, which  were  matched
        by  the  Reagan  government.  And in the US, the Congress froze the
        Contra aid funds.  The  resulting  de-facto  de-escalating  process
        produced two tired Nicaraguan camps, fighting an attrition war that
        neither could win, and hence prone to negociations.

             A unilateral disarmament, forced upon either of the  factions,
        could have never achieved such positive effect.

             Under these new conditions, President Arias,  of  Costa  Rica,
        using  a combination of economic incentives, international pressure
        and quiet diplomacy, carried out the Esquipulas negociations.   For
        them,  he received the gratitude of the international community and
        the Nobel Peace Prize.

             Today, as a result of the free  elections  agreed  during  the
        peace  talks,  the Nicaraguan opposition is in power and the region
        may well be on its way back to normality.   We  can,  again,  argue
        forever  that  "these  Sandinista rascalls" will never really yield

The Morning After                                              Page 37
J. L. Romeu


        power or that "these Contra rascalls" won't either.  With this,  we
        will  achieve  little else than killing the peace process before it
        even starts.  On the other hand, in spite of  the  many  and  large
        problems that exist, a real peace process could bring many benefits
        to all, including the US.

             The main concern is the military  problem.   Both  sides  bear
        large  resentment  product  of  the  war.  The Sandinista Army, the
        largest in Central America, has to be substantially  reduced.   And
        the  Contras  have to be disbanded.  Nicaraguans could even look to
        neighboring Costa Rica, where the army was disolved altogether,  in
        1950, after their short civil war.  Costa Rica has only had stable,
        peaceful and democratic governments after that.

             On the civic front, the Nicaraguan opposition won enough votes
        to  control  the Congress, but not enough to impose a congressional
        dictatorship.   Precisely  the  excessively   large   congressional
        controll  that  the  Sandinistas  exerted  during their government,
        which practically annulled any legal opposition, was in the root of
        much   of   the   country's   political  unrest.   This  time,  the
        Sandinistas,  who  are  now  in  the  opposition,  need  not   feel
        threatened  nor  at  the  mercy of the newly elected government, as
        occurred in the past.  And this can only  bring  stability  to  the
        process.

             Eventually, if the democratic spirit  catches  on,  the  three
        constituent  currents within Sandinismo may naturally separate.  We
        may see  new  alliances  emerge,  creating  the  three  traditional
        blocks,  left,  center and right, in Nicaragua, with Ortega and his
        followers forming a left wing party and the Chamorro's  a  centrist
        one.   This  would  show  that  the American support of UNO was, in
        fact, in favor of a pluralistic process  and  not  for  a  specific
        group.

             Consolidation of a democratic process in Nicaragua could  help
        end  the  Salvadorean  conflict,  too.   Simultaneous  and balanced
        international pressure on both Salvadorean factions could bring,  a
        de-escalation  of the war, followed by negociations.  For peace and
        war will be univocally linked in these two countries.

             There remains one large enemy of the  current  peace  process:
        Fidel Castro.  Castro needs to foster revolution abroad in order to
        divert American  attention  off  Cuba,  and  to  divert  the  Cuban
        people's  attention  from  their  difficult domestic problems.  But
        after  the  recent  Eastern  European  events,  Castro  has  become
        terrified   with   the   prospect   of   evolution   and   national
        reconciliation.  If the  Sandinistas  and  the  FMLN  can  actually
        evolve  into  left  wing  democratic  political  parties, Castro is
        doomed.  For, his 30 year old personal rule could be overthrown  by
        younger,  more open internal factions, willing to start a Bulgarian
        style opening to prevent a Rumanian style popular explosion.

The Morning After                                              Page 38
J. L. Romeu


             Undoubtedly, the Nicaraguan democratization process is a long,
        difficult  and  risky  one.   But  the payoff could be high and the
        alternatives sombre.   For  the  Nicaraguans,  it  would  mean  the
        prolongation  of  the  war,  followed by a military dictatorship of
        whomever wins it.  For the  Central  Americans,  the  worsening  of
        their regional political stability.

             And for the US, the prolongation of a foreign  policy  problem
        with large domestic political repercusions.

Vargas Llosa                                                   Page 39
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                              Making History in Peru:
                              =======================


                  Writer Mario Vargas Llosa vs Engineer Fugimori
                  ==============================================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post Standard.


                              Date: April 9th, 1990.

                             Published: June 5, 1990.

Vargas Llosa                                                   Page 40
J. L. Romeu


             This Sunday's Peruvian elections have  particularly  attracted
        the  interest of many Syracusans.  For, not only is Peru, a country
        of  20  million  and  three  times  the  size  of   California,   a
        representative  of  many  south  American Andean republics, but its
        leading presidential candidate is no stranger to this city.

             Yes, Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas  Llosa,  who  spent  three
        weeks  among  us during the Spring of 1988 lecturing on literature,
        history and sociology  as  Syracuse  University's  Jeannete  Watson
        Distinguished  Wisiting  professor  of Humanities, was the favorite
        candidate to win the first round of Peru's presidential  elections.
        If  you missed his conferences but want to find out about them, you
        can read them in the forthcomming book S.U.  Press is preparing for
        the summer.

             But precisely because we know him, some may be tempted to  ask
        how this elegant, well educated, white Peruvian intellectual can be
        the favorite candidate in a thid world country where one  third  of
        the  population speaks Quechua as their first language.  The answer
        is provided by the history of this country and the  characteristics
        of this man.

             Vargas Llosa was born in southern Peru,  in  1936,  and  spent
        most  of  his  first  ten  years  in neighboring Bolivia.  In Latin
        America, especially at the time and in the provincial cities  where
        this  writer  lived  (Arequipa, Cochabanba and Piura) there were no
        "burbs" nor "inner  cities"  and,  hence,  much  interaction  among
        different social classes was still possible.  It may well have been
        during this period that Vargas Llosa acquired his interest for, and
        first  knowledge of, Peruvian life that has always been at the soul
        of his best novels (La Casa Verde, Conversacion en La Catedral,  El
        Hablador).

             Later, as a teenager in Lima, Vargas Llosa attended a military
        school which provided the material for his first novel, La Ciudad y
        los Perros.  And followed a Humanities curriculum at the University
        of San Marcos, Lima, where he joined an underground marxist group.

             In the late fifties, Vargas Llosa moved to Spain  to  complete
        his doctorate, then to Paris, where he lived among the 1960's Latin
        American "literary boom" young writers and worked for Radio France.

             Like many other of his colleagues,  Vargas  Llosa  sympathised
        with the philosophy of French writer Jean Paul Sartre and also with
        the emerging Cuban Revolution.  He served, as literary jury member,
        for  several Casa de las Americas Cuban literary prize.  However by
        the end of the sixties, Vargas Llosa became disenchanted with Cuban
        policies  of  repression of freedom of (literary) expression and of
        sending dissidents, writers and young students to the  UMAP  forced
        labor  camps.   In  fact,  Vargas  Llosa  supported Cuban dissident
        writer Heberto Padilla when the Cuban  government  jailed  him  for
        writting  a  prize-winning  unorthodox  novel.  After promoting and
        open letter of support for Padilla, all ties between  Vargas  Llosa
        and Cuba were severed.

Vargas Llosa                                                   Page 41
J. L. Romeu


             During the seventies and throughout the eighties, Vargas Llosa
        became  President  of PEN International, the writer's organization,
        and continued producing novels and teaching and speaking at  famous
        European and American universities, while living between London and
        Lima.

             The fact that such a man has captivated the imagination  of  a
        large  number  of  Peruvians  is not strange.  The history of Latin
        America is full of military, revolutionary and  writers  that  have
        become  Presidents.   Examples  are  Bartolome  Mitre  and  Domingo
        Sarmiento, in Argentina,  during  the  nineteenth  century,  Romulo
        Gallegos  and  Romulo Betancourt in Venezuela, in the mid twentieth
        and, Dominicans Balaguer and Bosch, who will face each  other  this
        year,  just  to  name a few who have ranked high in esteem and have
        left a legacy behind them.

             As far as Peru is concerned, most Americans  know  it  is  the
        world's  largest  coca  producer.   But many ignore that, until the
        late sixties, it was also the  largest  fishing,  and  one  of  the
        largest copper, zinc and oil producers countries, too.  And that it
        held a percamipa of over $14,000 dollars a  year  and  suffered  an
        inflation  of  2700%  a  year in 1989.  It is no wonder that maoist
        Shining Path and pro-cuban Tupac  Amaru  guerrilla  movements  have
        fought the government in a civil war that has left, in the last ten
        years, over 15,000 dead and 17 million in damages!.

             Peruvians have tried several fixes to  their  problems  during
        the last thirty years.  Liberal president Belaunde, in the sixties,
        implemented mild reforms without success.  He was  followed  by  10
        years  of  a  populist  military  dictatorship  of  General Velasco
        Alvarado.  Velasco  nationalized  the  petroleum  and  other  basic
        industries  and implemented an extensive land reform.  But he could
        not  redress  the  country's  decaying  economy  and  the  military
        returned the government to the civilians in 1980.

             Belaunde was elected again, but could achieve little else this
        second  time.  APRA, an independent leftist party, came to power in
        1985 with young and  charismatic  president  Alan  Garcia.   Garcia
        undertook  a  vast  plan of nationalizations and proposed, in 1988,
        taking over the banking sector.  It was  this  last  political  and
        economic  measure that triggered Vargas Llosa's move into politics,
        at the head of "Libertad"  movement,  where  he  attained  national
        attention.

             After this, FREDEMO, ae center right  coalition  of  liberals,
        christian  democrats  and  conservatives,  was  organized  under  a
        neo-liberal platform.  FREDEMO proposed returning state enterprises
        to the private sector, pursuing a market economy and carried Vargas
        Llosa as their presidential candidate.  Their  claim  is  that  the
        huge  state  bureaucracy  is  the  culprit  of the current economic
        problems and that the "informal sector", the many small  to  middle
        sized "illigal" enterprises that operate in Peru without government
        licence but with government knowledge, has to be encouraged.

Vargas Llosa                                                   Page 42
J. L. Romeu


             In  addition  to  Vargas  Llosa,  there   were   eight   other
        presidential  contenders,  including APRA's Alva Castro and marxist
        Barrantes.  And a surprising and new independent candidate, Alberto
        Fujimori,  a  former college president and agricultural engineer of
        Japanese descent, popularly known as  "the  little  chinaman",  who
        actually  won  the  second place during the first run of early this
        month and will go, with Vargas  Llosa,  to  the  second  and  final
        election early in June.

             Fugimori, at the head of a small and new movement "Cambio '90"
        proposes  technology  and honesty in government as the cure for the
        country's problems.  And many Peruvians think he may attract  badly
        needed  Japanese  capital  and  technology.   Being  the opposition
        candidate to center-right Vargas  Llosa,  he  may  count  with  the
        support  of,  both, APRA and the marxist left, who will rather have
        an  independent  centrist  candidate  as  president  than  a   well
        organized conservative coalition in power.

             Fugimori's showing in the first round was surprising:   almost
        30%  against  the  33% of frontrunner, well known and well financed
        Vargas Llosa.  Fugimori ran as a middle of the road candidate  with
        an  ill  defined  platform,  arising  little  controversy  and many
        friends.  Vargas Llosa, in turn, overconfident of  his  poll  lead,
        announced  a  strict economic program, similar to the one currently
        under process in neighboring  Brazil,  which  scared  many  people.
        Also,   his   entourage,  heavily  upper-class  and  well-educated,
        distanced him from many Peruvians that saw  too  much  conservatism
        around  him.   All this made many to switch their vote to candidate
        Fugimori.

             But, of all, the biggest looser has  been  the  Shinning  Path
        guerrillas.   For, in spite of their threats of violence, the large
        voter turnout of the first electoral round was a clear message from
        the  Peruvian  people:  they want change in peace and not through a
        revolutionary dictatorship.

             Finally, the new president, whomever it turns out to be,  will
        receive  a country plagued with inflation, guerrilla insurgence and
        drug problems.  And since both  leading  candidates  are  political
        outsiders,  they  may  have  problems carrying out their innovative
        platforms against the old political establishment with  which  they
        may well clash.

             Let's wish the new Peruvian president luck.  He will need it.

Pluralism                                                      Page 43
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                            The March Toward Pluralism:
                            ===========================


                                    Bon Voyage!
                                    ===========





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                 Syracuse, NY 1320


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post Standard.


                            Date: December 10th, 1989.


                          Published: December 14th, 1989.

Pluralism                                                      Page 44
J. L. Romeu


             In our recent local elections, less than 60% of the registered
        voters  went  to  the  polls.   Some  critics  blame this apathy on
        general system complacency and point out that, in other  countries,
        citizens  vote  in  large  numbers  or demonstrate in hordes, where
        pluralism is lacking, claiming this precious right.

             Just look at the events in Eastern  Europe.   There,  a  rapid
        evolution  towards  pluralism  is  currently  taking  place with an
        unusual display of tolerance  and  moderation  by  all  sides.   In
        Poland  and  Hungary,  opposition  groups  were first allowed, then
        legalized by the governing communists.  In exchange, the opposition
        accepted   to   soften  their  rhethoric  and  to  talk  out  their
        differences.  And a set of mutually accepted rules is currently  in
        the makings.

             As a contrast, in East Germany and Checoslovakia,  where  hard
        line  top leadership refused to evolve, violent demonstrations have
        forced them out.  New, more reform minded replacements have  agreed
        to   implement  the  popular  demands  for  a  system  change  -the
        alternative being a Beiging type blood bath and continuation of the
        present  stagnation.   Freedom  of  emigration, of the press and of
        religion,  previously  inexistent  in  Eastern  Europe,   are   now
        beginning to spout behind the crumbling Iron Curtain.

             This model of peaceful internal evolution from totalitarianism
        to  pluralism  is feasible, but only when implemented with firmness
        and honesty by both sides.  It worked in Portugal, in 1974,  during
        the  dismantling  of the Salazar-Caetano regime and, shortly after,
        with Franco's, in Spain.  In both cases these totalitarian  systems
        were  swiftly  and  non-violently  substituted by model pluralistic
        regimes, by the  cooperation  between  government  and  opposition.
        Both  sides  agreed  to  retire  their  top,  hard line leaders and
        replace them by pragmatic,  moderate  and  tolerant  new  ones.   A
        policy  of  reconciliation  within pluralism, that stemmed from the
        pressing  need   for   peace   and   stability,   substituted   the
        intransigence of one-party rule.

             Throughout the 80's, most of Latin America  has,  quietly  but
        steadily,  followed  the  same path from dictatorial to pluralistic
        government.   Starting  with  the  three  largest  Latin   American
        countries, Argentina, Mexico and Brasil, this trend is evident.

             In Mexico, for the first time in  50  years  under  PRI  party
        rule,  an  opposition candidate was elected state governor.  PRI is
        now ready to share power with the newly organized leftist Cardenas'
        followers  and  the  conservative  PAN party.  In Argentina, Carlos
        Menem,  a  moderate  Peronist,  succeeded   moderate   conservative
        president  Raul  Alfonsin,  who  was,  in  turn,  elected  when the
        military returned the government back to civilians after  the  1982
        Malvinas  War.  During the 70's, the Peronistas supported the urban
        guerrilla while the military suppressed  it.   It  was  called  the
        "dirty  war".   Today,  they  have  apparently agreed to bury their
        hatchets and work together to get the economy moving again.  And in
        Brazil,  after  20  years  of  military rule, a moderate transition

Pluralism                                                      Page 45
J. L. Romeu


        government just held elections last month.  The two front  runners,
        from  the moderate right and left, will face each other in a runoff
        election this month.

             In Chile, after 16 years of military dictatorship, the same is
        occuring.  In spite of enjoying one of the most stable economies in
        contemporary Latin America, the  people  voted  in  referendum,  to
        return  to  pluralism.   Hernan  Buchi, the government's candidate,
        will face Patricio Aylwin, a Christian Democrat sponsored by  a  16
        party  coalition  ranging  from  the  moderate right to socialists.
        Opinion polls say that  the  opposition,  who  has  been  receiving
        support from international organizations and foreign countries like
        Spain, will probably win by a 3:2 margin.

             In Nicaragua, the Central American peace process has  arranged
        an  election  for next February.  There, another broad coalition of
        12 parties, ranging from conservatives to communists, is contesting
        the  10 year Sandinista rule.  The coalition candidate is the widow
        of Editor Pedro Joaquin Chamorro, whose assassination in  1978  was
        the last drop in the process that ousted dictator Anastasio Somoza.
        Here, too, the opposition is receiving aid  from  abroad,  is  also
        ahead in the polls and is also claiming to take the country back to
        pluralism.

             In Peru, novelist and former PEN president Mario Vargas  Llosa
        is  heading a right of center coalition in next year's presidential
        election.  Vargas Llosa, who as  a  visiting  scholar  delivered  a
        series  of  lectures  at  Syracuse  University last spring, is also
        ahead in the opinion polls and is also claiming to be the  peaceful
        alternative  to  the  violent Shinning Path, the drug lords and the
        current economic crisis the country is living.

             In  Uruguay,  last  month's  elections  returned  a   moderate
        conservative  as  president  and  the candidate from a coalition of
        socialists, communists and former Tupamaros, as the  Mayor  of  the
        national  capital.   Tupamaros,  now a political party, were former
        urban guerrillas.  The uruguayan people, in a display of tolerance,
        have  voted  for  the  Tupamaros  in  the  local  election and have
        ratified an amnesty law for the military in a national referendum.

             Presidential elections have also taken place, or will  shortly
        take  place,  in  Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Dominican
        Republic and Venezuela, to name a few.   Unfortunately,  there  are
        still exceptions to this trend towards pluralism in Latin America.

             In Panama, Gen.  Noriega cancelled  the  vote  count  when  he
        realized  his  candidate  was  loosing.   in  Haiti,  in  spite  of
        Duvalier's departure, the military still run the  country.   In  El
        Salvador,  pro-marxist  guerrillas have interrupted the peace talks
        to  successfully  pursue  their  war  effort   to   overthrow   the
        government.   And  in  Cuba,  Fidel Castro refuses to implement the
        mildest of perestroikas for fear that he will follow the same  fate
        of  recently deposed Honecker, Yivkov and Jakes, who six months ago
        also looked strong and popular to their muffled people.

Pluralism                                                      Page 46
J. L. Romeu


             All these events show that,  totalitarianism  from  right  and
        left,  has  not been able to solve the social and economic problems
        nor bring happiness  to  the  people.   Pluralistic  democracy,  by
        itself,  cannot  guarantee economic boom nor social peace.  But, at
        least it may help create  the  general  mood  that  allows  working
        towards these worthy goals.

Bush's Trip                                                    Page 47
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                    The Enterprise for the Americas Initiative
                    ==========================================


                           Bush's Trip to Latin America.
                           =============================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                          Submitted to: The Post Standard


                            Date: November 29th, 1990.


                          Published: December 7th, 1990.

Bush's Trip                                                    Page 48
J. L. Romeu


             Next week, President Bush will complete a six-nation  tour  of
        South   America.    Bush's   tour,   the  Enterprise  for  Americas
        Initiative, is part of an effort to establish closer  economic  and
        political ties with the Latin American countries.

             This is not a futile or  isolated  event.   In  the  past  few
        months  we have seen rapid changes occurring all over the world.  A
        "new world order" is emerging; one which nobody knows  exactly  how
        it  will  be.   And wise, large and rich nations like the U.S., are
        preparing to play their new role in it  under  the  most  favorable
        conditions.

             This new order was triggered, in a large part, by the  process
        of  Perestroika  in  the Soviet Union and by the dismantling of the
        totalitarian comunist states in Eastern Europe.  But also,  by  the
        processes  of political and economic union in Western Europe, which
        begins in 1992, and the economic development by the  Asian  nations
        of the Pacific Rim.

             Since  the  geographical  areas  of  economic  and   political
        interests  are currently been redrawn, it is smart for the U.S.  to
        review and revitalize its interests in the American continent,  its
        natural  habitat.   A  continent where, not always, the role of the
        U.S.   has  been  perceived  as  a   positive   one.    And   where
        anti-American   sentiment   has   often   been   exploted   by  the
        international enemies of the U.S.  as well as the local demagogues,
        to the best of their selfish interests.

             Such  revitalization  process  started  last  year  with   the
        economic  treaty  between  U.S.   and  Canada,  and followed by the
        recent encounter between Presidents Bush  and  Salinas.   And  such
        commercial  ventures  may constitute the prelude of more with other
        countries South of the Rio Grande.

             Latin America has quietly moved  ahead  in  the  past  fifteen
        years.  Since the mid 1970's, slowly but surely, all Latin American
        countries except Cuba  have  established  political  pluralism  and
        democracy.   Brazil  and  Argentina,  Peru  and  Uruguay,  Ecuador,
        Bolivia, Paraguay and  recently  Chile,  have  now  freely  elected
        governments.   Others,  like  Bolivia,  have  established  a record
        number of successive free elections without a  military  coup.   In
        Nicaragua,   civil   war  gave  way  to  a  democratically  elected
        government and in El Salvador, the United Nations may soon  mediate
        a  cease fire, while government and opposition continue their peace
        conversations in Mexico City.

             But freedom alone, does not feed people; jobs  and  money  do.
        Economic  development  fosters  political  stability like no theory
        can.  In addition to pluralism, and a higher standard of living  in
        Latin  America  can  create  the potential markets that our foreign
        trade is searching for, these days.  Thus, their economic expansion
        and  political  stability will eventually benefit our economy, too.
        Maybe this is God's way of rewarding a good deed.

Bush's Trip                                                    Page 49
J. L. Romeu


             Stronger economies would also  open,  to  the  Latin  American
        peasants,  alternative markets that would allow the substitution of
        Coca cultures by more orthodox crops.  And this by-product,  alone,
        may  prove  sufficient  to  justify  providing  economic aid to the
        economies of these countries.

             In addition, the past few years have seen an increase  in  the
        illegal  immigration  of  Latin Americans.  Some causes include the
        political instability, civil war and poor economic conditions  that
        prevail there.  An improvement of political and economic conditions
        may not only halt such  immigration  wave,  but  even  reverse  the
        migratory  movement,  as  has  recently  occurred  with  Chile  and
        Nicaragua.

             Finally,  there  is  still  another  political  advantage   in
        fostering  better  economic  conditions in Latin America.  This one
        affects Fidel Castro's totalitarian  regime.   In  Cuba,  there  is
        currently  a  devastating  economic  situation due, in part, to the
        poor management of Castro's admininstration  and  in  part  to  the
        faultering economic aid that previously came from the Soviet Union.

             If Cubans perceive  real  improvements  in  the  international
        trade  and economies of their neighboring Latin American countries,
        they may surely want to participate, to join the  Club.   But  Cuba
        should  pay the same registration fee that all other Latin American
        countries did.  The same fee  that  the  Chilean  and  P  araguayan
        totalitarian  regimes  paid:   a return to pluralism and democracy.
        Like in Chile; like in Checoslovaquia.  No more, no less.

             Essentially because they are true, such arguments,  economical
        and  political,  are  certainly much stronger than any chauvinistic
        slogan or  rationalization  Castro  may  offer  the  muffled  Cuban
        people.

U.S.-Mexico Free Trade                                         Page 50
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                         U.S.-Mexico Free Trade Agreement:
                         =================================


                                Some Pros and Cons.
                                ===================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post-Standard.


                                Date: May 15, 1991.

U.S.-Mexico Free Trade                                         Page 51
J. L. Romeu


             Is a Free Trade Agreement with Mexico a blessing or  a  curse?
        This  question  has recently been on the minds of many, since every
        positive or negative aspect of the deal can potentially  affect  us
        all.   Will  it take away more jobs?  Will it hurt the environment?
        Will  it  hurt  organized  labor  and   small   and   middle   size
        organizations?   Or  will  it  boost  our  economy and make us more
        competitive in the forthcomming, ever enlarging world of the twenty
        first century?

             Everything signals out  that  the  nineties  will  become  the
        decade  of  the economic blocks.  Europe will form one, politically
        and economically, in 1992.  Eastern Europe, with its highly trained
        and  low  wage work force will likely try to join it.  The Japanese
        and the rest of  the  Asian  countries  of  the  Pacific  Rim,  are
        economically  stronger  every  day,  and may start working toward a
        closer cooperation.   And  even  in  Latin  America,  the  recently
        created   MERCOSUR,  a  market  that  includes  Argentina,  Brasil,
        Paraguay and Uruguay, is now a reality.

             In the nineteenth century, the United States had the foresight
        to become a large and well organized nation at a time when the rest
        of the world was quarreling with fractionalism.  America  became  a
        vast  free  market  where  products  were  produced and distributed
        without  barriers,  creating  the  current  industrial  power   and
        affluency.   But  now,  the  rest  of  the  industrialized world is
        quickly catching up:  everybody is forming new economic blocks, the
        size  of  the United States and more.  This alone, is a good reason
        for taking a second  closer  look  at  the  positive  and  negative
        consequences of a potential trade agreement with Mexico.

             There has been stern opposition to a free trade agreement with
        Mexico.   Some  argue  that there is something basically wrong with
        this mix, for the two countries not only have  different  languages
        and  cultures  but also standards of living and development levels.
        But  a  similar  situation  occurs  in  Europe,  where  Greeks  and
        Portuguese  are  joining  their disimilar German and Dutch cousins.
        And they will achieve it in '92!

             Others argue that such free trade agreement would increase the
        number  of jobs we loose.  Or that it would decrease the pay of our
        workforce and would weaken yet further our unions.  For, the higher
        paid  American  workforce  could  never  compete  with the low wage
        mexican  worker.    Finally,   others   argue   that   unscrupulous
        capitalists,  operating  in  a country with few environmental laws,
        would polute to the limit to make a fast buck!

             We have, indeed, been loosing jobs way before any  talk  of  a
        trade  agreement  with  Mexico,  and  for  all  the above mentioned
        reasons.  Recently, we have lost many local jobs to  Korea  and  to
        Latin  America.   We have also lost many more jobs to the migration
        of New York industry to southern states.  And things won't get  any
        better, with or without a deal with Mexico.

U.S.-Mexico Free Trade                                         Page 52
J. L. Romeu


             However, if an assembly shop goes to Asia or South America (or
        possibly  to Eastern Europe in not too distant future), chances are
        that the American worker will never see any fallout  of  it  again.
        If,  on  the  other hand, it goes to nearby Mexico, the product may
        come back for a local high-tech finish or final processing.  We may
        indeed  loose  much low tech blue collar jobs, which we would loose
        anyway in the long run.  But we may keep many other more  technical
        ones  we  would also loose, were these companies to move to another
        continent.

             With respect to pay scales,  polution  and  unions,  there  is
        nothing more contagious than betterment options.  People learn fast
        and Mexicans  are  not  dumb.   However,  we  are  not  talking  of
        competing  job  categories  but of migration of job categories that
        our high tech and more sophisticated society has priced out of  our
        labor  market.   And careful legislation and treatise writing could
        take care of the environment.

             The most important argument against  a  free  trade  agreement
        with  Mexico  comes from those who fear American technology may end
        up in the hands of our competitors.  Or that competitors would  use
        Mexico  as  a  spring  board to flood the American market and avoid
        import  tariffs  and  treatises.   This  argument   deserves   full
        attention  and  a careful study, for it may become the Achiles heel
        of the whole deal.

             On the other  hand,  a  free  trade  agreement  shows  several
        positive elements.  Mexico is our neighbor and the door to the vast
        Latin American markets.  It compares  favorably  in  education  and
        development  with  our  other  neighbors  to  the  South.   And its
        geographical  proximity  mitigates  some  Mexican  deficiencies  in
        infrastructure which have to be corrected in short time.

             Through Mexico, the U.S.  can  sell  many  products  in  Latin
        America,  manufactured  at  a lower cost and more appropriately for
        consumption in less  affluent  and  sophisticated  societies.   For
        example, if American industry produces less expensive, stronger and
        less sophisticated cars, trucks and tractors that  Guatemalans  and
        Bolivians  can  afford and run in their rugged roads and operate in
        their harsh conditions, the distant Japanese  and  Europeans  won't
        have a chance.

             Finally,  there  is  yet   another,   strategic   reason   for
        establishing  a  healthier  economic  relation  with Mexico and, by
        transitivity, with the rest of  the  countries  south  of  the  Rio
        Grande.

             After the demise of the Soviet empire and the  democratization
        of  Easter  Europe,  the  world is quickly changing.  But its final
        form is not yet well defined.  It would be good  policy  to  foster
        economic and political stability amidst our closest neighbors.  And
        there is no doubt  that  an  good  trade  agreement  would  booster
        Mexican  economy,  decrease  its  inflation rate and promote higher
        standards  of  living.   Therefore,  it  would  also  solidify  the

U.S.-Mexico Free Trade                                         Page 53
J. L. Romeu


        political  stability of a country with which we share 2000 miles of
        natural borders!

             A hasty decision in pro or against a free trade agreement with
        Mexico  may  either  compromise  the  American  economy  or  kill a
        beautiful  opportunity  for  a  better   political   and   economic
        international  position twenty years from now.  But, with a careful
        analysis of the pros and cons, good will and foresight, a  mutually
        beneficial deal may well come out.

No Mexican Siesta.                                             Page 54
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                The Mexican Siesta:
                                ===================


                                 Myth or Reality?
                                 ================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post Standard.


                              Date: August 16, 1991.



                            Published: August 23, 1991.

No Mexican Siesta.                                             Page 55
J. L. Romeu


             It was 2:30 in the afternoon and  our  plane  was  landing  at
        Juarez  Airport  in  Mexico  City.   I  thought of a Clint Eastwood
        movie, where the actor rides into Mexicantown at  this  same  time.
        Everything  was  quiet  under  the  summer  sun.   The streets were
        deserted...  It was siesta time.

             However, the Mexico City I was  found  was  far  from  asleep.
        Except  for the banks, government offices and churches, which close
        for  lunch  time,  everything  was  bursting  with  activity,  with
        literally tens of thousands of people rushing through -in this city
        of over 23 million people!

             The first thing we encountered was pollution:  this  scent  of
        car  exhaust  that  would accompany us throughout our visit.  As we
        took a taxi downtown, we also  discovered  the  first  thing  about
        Mexico:   it  is  a  country  of  tens  of  thousands  of small but
        independent entrepreneurs.  For taxis -as well as mini-buses called
        'peceros'  (fish bowls, perhaps for their many windows that display
        the pasenger s inside) are all independently owned and operated and
        constitute  a  good  third  of all vehicles you see on the streets.
        They all travel at incredible speeds in a bumper to bumper traffic,
        zigzaging from lane to lane -while causing very little accidents.

             Our hotel was in the  downtown  section,  with  its  beautiful
        colonial  buildings  and  cobbled  stoned  streets,  far  from  the
        expensive and modern Zona Rosa tourist zone.  But it was  close  to
        the  Bellas Artes center, where the famous Mexican Folkloric Ballet
        and other first rate shows take place, and to the Zocalo,  Mexico's
        main square displaying a four centuries old cathedral, the National
        Palace and the Templo Mayor, an aztec temple dug up by pure  chance
        about twenty years ago, during the construction of the subway.

             In downtown Mexico City you see literally  hundreds  of  small
        and   independent   shops   and  stores,  that  specialize  in  one
        merchandise and are located by  trade.   The  city  wakes  up  late
        -don't even try to find the morning newspaper before 8:00 am in the
        morning.  Stores start opening at 9:00 and start closing at 8:00 in
        the evening, some running as late as 10:00 pm.

             You shop by street as you  would  shop  by  departments  in  a
        store.   There  is a street of the jewelers and one of the clothing
        and leather stores, of the bookstores (with  incredible  number  of
        them),  the  street  of  the  hardware  stores...   And  out in the
        sidewalks  you  find,  one  next  to  the  other,  street   vendors
        displaying  all  sorts of merchandise:  from umbrellas to tortillas
        and enchiladas.  For, everywhere in Mexico, you find people selling
        food in the streets at almost any time).

             We saw a vendor displaying a live snake and performing a  very
        interesting  show,  in  the  centric  Alameda  park, to promote his
        cure-all medicine.  We saw vendors  in  the  halways  of  the  very
        orderly  and  efficient subway, which has the unique characteristic
        of displaying, in  several  stations,  archeological  constructions
        that  were  unearthed  at  the  time  of  its construction.  We saw

No Mexican Siesta.                                             Page 56
J. L. Romeu


        vendors displaying their merchandise on tables, fastened to  street
        poles  bearing  the sign:  "absolutely forbidden to solicit or sell
        in this area"!  And  we  saw  many  children,  women,  and  elderly
        persons  selling  pencils,  singing, or performing other tasks, and
        solliciting some money -which shows a positive  work  ethic,  since
        they were always providing something in return.

             On one occasion, for example, our bus stopped at a  red  light
        on a busy intersection.  At this time, two men ran to the middle of
        this busy avenue, mounted on top of the other and started  juggling
        five  balls  for about one minute.  Then, they came down and passed
        the hat to the amused drivers, and rushed back to the sidewalk,  to
        wait for the next red light change.

             For arts and crafts, Mexico is the place  to  go.   There  are
        several  markets,  the most typical being La Ciudadela, reminiscent
        of the pre Colombian open air aztec markets.  There  you  can  find
        anything  you  fancy  in  clay,  straw  or  fabric  hand-crafts  at
        incredible prices:  two dollars (six thousand  pesos)  for  a  clay
        mask  or  a puppet, ten dollars for a hand-embroided blouse...  But
        if you want silver, better  bring  dollars  with  you,  for  it  is
        beautiful but expensive!

             One striking thing to the visitor is security:  in  banks,  in
        government  buildings or in public places as bus stations.  You can
        see men and women guards, with sub-machine  guns  and  bullet-proof
        vests,  standing in front of them.  Visiting the managing editor of
        Excelsior,  one  of  the  largest  dailies,  required  a   security
        procedure  similar  to  the  one  we  recently  followed  to give a
        technical talk at  RADC  in  Rome,  NY.   Evidently,  Mexicans  are
        concerned  with  violence  prevention, given the many problems they
        have had in the recent past.

             Mexico has suffered a severe economic crisis, its peso falling
        in  a short time, from less than a hundred to three thousand to the
        dollar.  In  addition,  the  country's  political  system  is  also
        undergoing  a change:  'la apertura' (opennes).  Currently the PRI,
        the party in power for the last sixty years, is preparing to  share
        power  with  the  opposition.   Hence, for the elections of Sunday,
        August 18, there is barely a wall or a street pole where  you  wont
        find  a  poster for this or that candidate of one of the four large
        and half a dozen small parties that range from the conservatives to
        the communists.

             Parties have taken very strong positions in  favor  or  agains
        the Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.  and Canada.  Left-of-center
        PRI, the government party, favors it; conservatives are  squeptical
        and leftists denounce it as a sell-out of the country.

             But many in the streets see Free Trade  as  a  positive  thing
        that will create new jobs and economic stability.  As a nation with
        many small and middle entrepreneurs, Mexicans  look  forward  to  a
        freer and larger market.

No Mexican Siesta.                                             Page 57
J. L. Romeu


             And with their new political  system  of  true  pluralism  and
        their  economic  dynamism,  Mexicans  may well be able to achieve a
        more efficient system that increases their lot.

Columbus                                                       Page 58
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                               Christopher Columbus:
                               =====================



                            Half a Milenium Afterwards.
                            ===========================



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu
                                   P.O. Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217



                         Submitted to: The Post Standard.

                              Date: October 8, 1991.



                           PUBLISHED: OCTOBER 11, 1991.

Columbus                                                       Page 59
J. L. Romeu


             There  is  much  said  and  done   these   days,   about   the
        Quincentennial  of  Christopher  Columbus'  trip to America.  Three
        reproductions of his "caravelles" or  ships,  have  been  built  in
        Spain  and are already sailing the seas.  A huge international fair
        will take place next  year  in  Seville,  longtime  the  main  port
        between  Spain  and its American empire.  NPR has spent millions to
        produce a sevenl-hour series on the topic, comparable to its recent
        series on the American Civil War.  And many indian groups, all over
        the American continent, are protesting for the  celebration  of  an
        event  that  represented  much  disruption  and  suffering in their
        lives.

             The relevance  of  Columbus'  voyage  is  unquestionable:   it
        changed,  for good or evil, the course of the world in at least two
        continents.  What is under scrutiny these days is,  first,  whether
        Columbus'   trip   was   really  a  "discovery",  as  it  has  been
        characterized.  And, second, whether  its  overall  effect  can  be
        assessed   as   positive,   negative   or  mixed,  given  that  the
        extermination of large portions of indigenous  population  and  the
        slavery system were two of its most visible consequences.

             It is unquestionable that America was inhabited by humans when
        Columbus  arrived.   And  many  of the cultures, e.g.  Mayan, Inca,
        Aztec,  were  quite  advanced.   Hence,  Colombus  could  not  have
        discovered  something  that  was  already known to millions.  Also,
        there is some evidence that other Europeans, e.g.  the Vikings, had
        already  reached  North America, hopping from Iceland to Greenland,
        to other smaller north Atlantic islands.  So what was it  that  the
        Italian sailor discovered, if anything at all?

             Colombus was, essentially, a seaman, in a time when few  dared
        far  away  from the seacoast.  No one, before Colombus, had crossed
        an open ocean like the Mid Atlantic, using  the  simple  technology
        available at the time.  In a way, Columbus' trip in 1492 represents
        the same as the flight to  the  Moon  in  1969:   both  opened  new
        horizons  to  the  human adventure.  His discovery was not one of a
        foreign land, but one of a  totally  new  way  of  travelling.   He
        opened  the  Oceans  as  a  communications  route.   Shortly  after
        Columbus, Magellian crossed the Pacific  and  Vasco  Da  Gama,  the
        Indian  Oceans and only then, the world became round in a practical
        sense.

             The American Conquest came later, when  Colombus  had  already
        finished  his  job  and  was  preparing to die, poor and forgotten,
        somewhere in Spain.  With the Conquest  the  Spaniards  proved  (as
        many  other  Europeans did, later) that ruthlessness was a trait of
        the times not of a race.  For, if human sacrifices were held in the
        Aztec  and Inca religions, the torments inflicted to chiefs Hatuey,
        in Cuba, Tupac Amaru in Peru and Caupolican, in Chile, to establish
        the  Spanish  domination, were no less barbarian.  American indians
        finally were conquered by the European who then brought the African
        slaves,  then  Asian  and  East  Indians,  imported as cheap labor.
        These  human  elements,  jointly  with  all  possible   admixtures,
        populate America today.

Columbus                                                       Page 60
J. L. Romeu


             But,  what  did  this   process   of   conquest,   settlement,
        displacement, suffering and force bring about?  How different would
        the world, as we know it today, had been, had Columbus  not  sailed
        to America in 1992?

             Since the beginning America  has  had  as  much  influence  in
        Europe  as  Europe  has had in America.  It is questionable whether
        Europe, without having exploited the American  riches,  would  have
        achieved the economic and intellectual level that allowed the great
        discoveries of mathematics and physics as well as the  writings  of
        the  encyclopedists,  in the XVIII Century.  All these events had a
        great effect in triggering the American Revolution of 1776.  It  is
        also  possible that Lafayette and other Frenchmen who came to fight
        for the  American  Revolution,  would  have  perhaps  hesitated  in
        supporting  their 1789 revolution, had they not seen first hand the
        American one.  Had the French Revolution and Napoleon not  occured,
        the   Spanish  nations  would  probably  have  not  obtained  their
        independence in the early 1800's.  And  the  Europeans  would  have
        perhaps  found  it  more  attractive  to strip the decaying Spanish
        Empire of its productive colonies than to go and develop their  own
        in Africa and Asia, as they actually did.

             What Europe would have been without America can  be  assessed,
        to  a  given  extent, by looking at the Eastern European countries.
        These had few contacts with the  American  Colonization  experience
        and  developed  tardly.  What Latin America would have been without
        the European colonization is more difficult to imagine.  It is very
        possible  that  another sailor, from another country and at a later
        date, would have finally conquered the Ocean.  At least with Spain,
        Latin  America  achieved  a  level  of  intermixture  that  largely
        diminishes the hatred  between  former  masters  and  servants  and
        peoples of different races.

             When you visit the Aztec archeological site of "Templo Mayor",
        in  Mexico  City, you find an enormous inscription on the wall.  It
        says of  how  modern  mexicans  are  not  pure  indians,  not  pure
        Spaniards, but a racial and cultural admixture of peoples which has
        created  something  different:   the  Mexican.   Such  a   positive
        feeling,  that makes room for all whatever their ethnic extraction,
        is not uncommon in modern Latin America.

             The  history  of  humanity  is  the  history   of   successive
        conquests.   Columbus'  voyage  opened  an  historical  epoch  that
        inflicted much pain to peoples in America and Africa.  But it  also
        opened  a  Pandora  Box  of new possibilities that we can all share
        today as partners.  We can either try to turn  back  the  clock  of
        history  or try to make the best of it by looking to the future and
        working together in good faith.

             We can, then and in a positive way, look to the past to  avoid
        committing the same mistakes and to heal any open wound.

Chilean Referendum                                             Page 61
J.L. Romeu


                                         .







                        The Chilean Referendum: We and It.
                        ==================================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu



                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203

                                  (315) 476-8994




                       Submitted to Syracuse Post Standard.


                          Published: October 15th, 1988.

Chilean Referendum                                             Page 62
J.L. Romeu


             "How do you like the Chilean  Referendum  results?"  asked  my
        colleague,  placing  his  tray on the dining hall table.  "It was a
        rotund NO for Pinochet's regime!"

             "Just love them; we won!" said I, finishing a mouthful  of  my
        sandwich.  "I think I'm going to celebrate big tonight!"

             "That's curious", he said.  "I thought you were for  the  YES.
        You  are against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua and against Castro in
        Cuba.  Aren't you for the continuation of  Pinochet's  dictatorship
        in Chile?"

             "I am for pluralistic democracy across the board:  in Chile as
        well as in Cuba -and Nicaragua.  Not just at selected places", said
        I.  "Now that democracy is on its way in Chile,I am looking forward
        to  seeing  all  those  who worked to bring pluralism back there to
        also contribute their fair share to bring it  back  to  other  more
        senior dictatorships.  Castro included!"

             "But its not the same", said my colleague.  "Castro is working
        for the Cuban people, and you wouldn't like to go back to Batista's
        dictatorship, would you?"

             "Those are the same  reasons  that  were  argued  by  Pinochet
        supporters in Chile", I answered him.  " 'Do you want to go back to
        the four digit inflation of 1973?' was  the  favorite  slogan  that
        Pinochet  supporters  were running throughout the entire Referendum
        campaign".   Inflation  was  1200%  when  President   Allende   was
        overthrown,  and  there  were shortages of food, fuel and very long
        lines to obtain these goods in those times.

             "No!" I continued saying to my colleague.  "We want  for  Cuba
        the same options that we want for Chile:  political pluralism.  And
        we are a million exiles, which constitute 10% of the Cuban people!"
        I  had  finished  my lunch, so I picked up my tray and got ready to
        leave.  But then, I turned and asked him:

             "Do you also want for Cuba the same option you seek for Chile?
        Or  do  you  want for Chile the same option we have in Cuba?" And I
        left.

             The fact of the matter is that the recent  Chilean  Referendum
        is  an  excellent occasion to analyze, objectively, the Consistency
        and Reciprocity of our political beliefs.

             Chile and Cuba represent  two  radically  different  political
        models which, like often occur with all extremes, are very close to
        each other.  They  are  both  totalitarian  regimes  which  present
        themselves  as  the  only  National  alternatives  for "saving" the
        country from two different but extremely convenient evils.

             Castro came into power in Cuba thirty years ago,  after  seven
        years  of  Batista's  authoritarian dictatorship.  At the head of a
        popular revolution, Castro promised the Cuban people  a  return  to

Chilean Referendum                                             Page 63
J.L. Romeu


        pluralism  and  good  government.   He  then  took  over the media,
        dissolved the political parties, the army, nationalized the big and
        small industry, commerce and agriculture and then announced that he
        was a Marxist.  Opponents to his political  and  economic  policies
        were  jailed, fired or forced to emigrate.  One million Cubans roam
        the earth, and many uncounted others suffer in silence inside Cuba,
        ever  since.   Castro  declared himself the "guardian" of the Cuban
        nationality  against   the   American   imperialism,   accused   of
        pro-american  sympathies  any  body who disagreed with his policies
        and aligned himself with the Soviet Union.

             Pinochet came to power in Chile fifteen years  ago,  in  1973.
        He  deposed  Chilean  President  Salvador  Allende  who three years
        earlier gained power in a deadlocked election, where his  Socialist
        coalition  obtained  36%  of  the  popular  vote  (to  28%  for the
        Christian Democrats and 34%  for  the  Conservatives).   After  the
        military  coup,  Pinochet  dissolved the Congress and the Political
        Parties, banned the unions and  sold  back  to  private  hands  the
        companies that Allende's government had nationalized or intervened.
        Pinochet also portraits his government as  the  one  which  reduced
        inflation from 1200% to 20% annually and that has reinstalled order
        and stability to a country which was "at the verge of a civil warin
        1973".

             As a result of these two dictatorial regimes,  both  countries
        suffered  greatly,  generating thousands of political prisoners and
        political exiles.  Tens of thousands in the case of Chile,  had  to
        leave  their  homeland  for 15 years; they are now back, organizing
        their followers  for  the  NO  in  this  referendum.   Hundreds  of
        thousands in the case of Cuba also had to leave the island.  Castro
        has never talked about a  possible  return,  nor  of  allowing  the
        Reorganization   of   political   parties,   nor  of  allowing  the
        organization of an internationally supervised Referendum  in  Cuba.
        There is no independent -let alone opposition- media in Cuba.  Only
        the government press can drill the Cuban people with their official
        interpretation of the world.  That is why so many Cubans turn every
        day to Radio Marti, the BBC and other short wave radio stations for
        information.

             Excuses to justify a totalitarian regime we can  always  find.
        Our  question,  however, remains the same.  Deep in our hearts, are
        we simply and  honestly  in  favor  or  the  pluralistic  political
        system?   Or are we kidding ourselves -and maybe others- and really
        supporting pluralism only at selected places, where our friends are
        out  of  government?   Are  we  really  searching  for all sorts of
        excuses to cover up defects and uncomfortable realities  for  those
        governments  we  like  and  support  while condemning, for the same
        behavior, those we dislike?

             Answers for these very personal questions are ones  that  only
        each  of  us can find in the privacy of our hearts.  Whether we are
        willing and able to provide answers for  them,  with  candor,  will
        define the type of human beings that we are.

A Cuban Referendum?                                            Page 64
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                                A Cuban Referendum?
                                = ===== ===========



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu



                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY. 13203


                            Home Phone: (315) 476-8994
                            Work Phone: (607) 753-2970



                                January 6th, 1989.


                                       ___ ____ ________

                          Submitted to The Post Standard


                          Published: January 13th, 1989.

A Cuban Referendum?                                            Page 65
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Six months ago, when an article of  mine  on  Cuban  Political
        Prisoners found its way into the Herald American's Op-Ed page, some
        of my close friends gave me a kind smile.   I  had  said  that  the
        problem of the Cuban political prisoners could be completely solved
        by  allowing  freedom  of  expression  and  having  internationally
        supervised, multi-party elections in Cuba.

             In October, I wrote about the Chilean  Referendum  in  a  Post
        Standard  Op-Ed  piece  and  established  a  comparison between the
        Chilean and Cuban dictatorships.  I pointed out  how  Pinochet  had
        carried  out  an internationally supervised Referendum in Chile and
        had accepted his  defeat  in  it,  and  how  Castro  wouldn't  even
        consider  such an idea.  Some of my pro-Castro acquaintances raised
        an eyebrow.

             A  lot  has  been  written  lately  about  a  possible   Cuban
        Referendum  ever  since  General Pinochet allowed one in Chile.  In
        the United States, and in Spain and France, in Costa Rica and Peru,
        columnists  have discussed the issue at length, breaking the ground
        for a formal proposal.

             It finally came the last week of December.  An Open Letter  to
        President  Castro  was  issued  in  Paris  and  signed  by over 160
        internationally known intellectuals.  The letter was sent to Havana
        and  simultaneously  published  in  18 capitals of Europe and Latin
        America.  European  intellectuals  of  the  stature  of  playwright
        Ionesco  and  director  Fellini,  of  Latin American writers Vargas
        Llosa and Octavio Paz, and of exiled Cuban poets and writers Arenas
        and Perera, have openly demanded from authoritarian Castro to be no
        less than his colleague, authoritarian Pinochet.

             These   intellectuals   are   demanding   an   internationally
        supervised  Referendum  for  Cuba,  within a multi-party system and
        freedom of the press framework, like Pinochet  did  in  Chile.   No
        more, no less!

             This time, it was Castro's turn to raise an eyebrow.

             What  was  Castro's  answer  to  this  open  letter  from  the
        intellectuals?   At  first,  he ignored it, as he usually does with
        the things that bother him.  Inside Cuba, this always  works.   But
        it didn't work this time.

             Castro is currently looking for a political opening  in  Latin
        America.  For the first time in years he has been invited to attend
        the  inauguration  of   Latin   American   presidents   (Equatorian
        president's   inauguration   in   the  fall,  Mexican  Salina's  in
        December).  Rumors are that he will also attend Perez's in Caracas,
        Venezuela,  next month.  Castro's newly found social urge, plus the
        relevance of the intellectuals who signed the open letter  and  its
        widespread diffussion in Europe and America, make it impossible for
        Castro to duck the issue this time.

A Cuban Referendum?                                            Page 66
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Therefore, Havana's answer was that there is  no  need  for  a
        Cuban  Referendum.   That the Cuban people overwhelmingly supported
        Castro 30 years ago, at the start of the  revolution.   But  Castro
        doesn't   give  the  Cuban  people  the  right  to  reevaluate  his
        performance and change their minds  if  unsatisfied,  like  anybody
        else  in  this  world  does.  Havana also says that Castro has been
        duly re-elected according to the  hierarchichal  electoral  process
        defined  in  the  1975  Cuban  Constitution.   In this process, the
        people elect directly only provincial delegates.  These  elect  the
        members  of the congress who, in turn, elect the President.  All of
        this in a country with  a  single  employer,  a  single  party  and
        government-controlled  media.   General  Franco,  in Spain, and Dr.
        Salazar, in Portugal,  were  also  regularly  re-elected  in  their
        respective  countries for forty years.  However, when both of these
        strong men died and a really free electoral process took place, the
        opposition won beyond any doubts.

             Is it that Castro, in the bottom of his heart, is  fearful  of
        running the same fate as Pinochet has?  Is it that his overwhelming
        ego cannot handle the situation of barely  winning  the  referendum
        -let alone of loosing it- if it takes place within the framework of
        freedom of the press and multi-party system?

             If Castro thinks that this matter ends here, with  his  rotund
        NO to the public demand for internationally supervised elections in
        Cuba, he is dead wrong.  This is barely the  beginning.   From  now
        on,  and until he provides a satisfactory solution to this problem,
        Castro will have to live with this question wherever he goes.   And
        he wants to go places.

             Castro is looking for an opening  in  Latin  America  and  the
        Western  world  that  will  help  him  through  the  squeeze  he is
        receiving from the Soviet Union -Castro has refused  to  carry  out
        any  perestroika  in  Cuba.  He is dying to be invited to Venezuela
        and other nations and to re-establish political and  economic  ties
        with Latin America.  Everybody wants to join the Club, when it is a
        good club.

             But everything has a price.  Pinochet had to yield to the idea
        of  a  Referendum.   Arafat,  to renounce terrorism.  Gorbachev, to
        implement Perestroika and Glasnost.

             Will Castro get a Free Ride?

30 Years of Castro                                             Page 67
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                            Bilan: 30 Years of Castro.
                            ==========================



                                        by


                                 Jorge Luis Romeu.

                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203

                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy.


                                        ________ _______

                           Submitted to Syracuse Herald.

                               February 11th, 1989.



                      Published: Sunday February 19th, 1989.

                                 Opinion Section.

30 Years of Castro                                             Page 68
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Fidel Castro dies -says an underground popular  joke-  and  is
        offered  the  option  of  going  to the Capitalist or the Communist
        Hell.  "What is the difference?" asks Castro, surprised.  "They are
        essentially the same", he is told.  "In both, you are laid on a bed
        of nails and run over by a bulldozer 24 hours a day.   But  in  the
        Communist  Hell,  either there is no gas to start the bulldozer, no
        spare parts to run it, or the driver doesn't show up!"

             This tells, in a nutshell, the story of the Cuban  Revolution:
        an  inefficient  present and an uncertain future.  To undertake its
        evaluation it is necessary to compare successes and failures in the
        political, economic and social areas, between 1959 and the present,
        trading off achievements vs costs.

             In  international  politics,  Castro  claims  achieving  Cuban
        independence  vis-a-vis  the United States and compares it with the
        dependent status of  pre-revolutionary  Cuba  and  of  other  Latin
        American  countries.   He  never  mentions,  though,  his  lack  of
        independence vis-a-vis  the  Soviet  Union,  evident  for  example,
        during  the  Missile  Crisis  of 1962.  At that time, Castro wasn't
        even consulted by Kruschev, in the process of removing  the  soviet
        missiles  from  Cuba.  Regarding internal politics , if Cuba had an
        authoritarian government under Batista, we are no better  off  with
        Castro's  totalitarian,  one-party  system.  Under Castro, Cuba has
        had the largest number of political prisoners (and  still  has  the
        largest   number   of  political  exiles)  in  the  entire  Western
        Hemisphere.

             In  the  economic  area,  Castro  first  boasts  about  Cuba's
        independence  from  the  United States and then complains about the
        devastating effects of the US.  Embargo on the Cuban economy.  This
        occurs   because   the   same   economic  problems  that  mortgaged
        pre-Castro's Cuba are still present today:  dependence on a  single
        export  staple (sugar cane) and on a single market (now, the Soviet
        Union).  In  the  internal  economy,  Castro  presents  a  singular
        full-employment  situation,  but  fails  to mention the 30-year old
        ration cards, the endemic black market, the acute  housing  problem
        and the lack of productivity among Cuban workers it has produced.

             Full employment has to be analyzed with care.   First,  during
        the   exodus   of  half  a  million  Cubans  in  the  sixties,  the
        unemployment problem was solved by filling the  jobs  left  by  the
        exiles.   However,  not  enough  new  jobs have been created by the
        Cuban economy to balance the natural population growth during these
        30  years.   Subemployment,  under  different  names,  is a fact in
        today's Cuba.  As a consequence, worker's wages  have  remained  at
        the  1960  levels.  For example, in May of 1980, an electrician was
        paid $190.00 a month, a secondary school  teacher,  $155.00  and  a
        statistician  $250.00.  At those wages, the government employs many
        more people than are really needed, converting  the  salaries  into
        subsidies.   Endemic  lack of productivity has been the consequence
        of 30 years with this economic policy.

30 Years of Castro                                             Page 69
Jorge Luis Romeu


             In the social area, Castro presents with pride big advances in
        the  medical,  dental and educational fields.  However, these gains
        should also be carefully weighed.  If it is true that  today  state
        clinics  and  schools  exist  practically everywhere in Cuba, it is
        also true that these services are not free.  The Cuban people  pays
        dearly  for  them, both with lack of formal freedoms (of speech, of
        association, of the press, etc.)  and  with  cash.   When  a  Cuban
        electrician, for example, is paid $190.00 for his 180 monthly hours
        of work, the rest of the value he has produced in that month  stays
        with the government.  One part goes to pay for his family's medical
        insurance, his children's schooling and all other  social  services
        he  receives.   Another  part  goes  for  the  services of those in
        welfare.  Finally, the larger part is kept by the government to pay
        for  the bureaucracy, the security forces, the Communist Party, the
        pro-government  propaganda  (including  the  lodging   and   travel
        expenses  of  foreign visitors), etc.  You can buy a lot of medical
        insurance and pay a lot of private schools with this last chunk  of
        money.   Since  only communist sympathisers are represented in this
        one-party system, non-communist workers have very  little  say  and
        less leverage in the way their money is spent.

             We have, thus, arrived at the  30th  anniversary  of  Castro's
        personal  regime.  Its pyramidal structure (Castro is President and
        Prime Mininster; his brother Raul, Head of the Army) does not offer
        many  advancement  opportunities  to  valuable,  enterprising young
        (communist and non-communist) Cubans.  Castro is not so  young  and
        good  looking  any  more and there are already internal symptoms of
        dissent.

             Young  Cuban  artists  have  created  semi-underground  groups
        (Grupo  Arte  y  Cultura)  which are writing satires and presenting
        unconventional exhibits in parks and streets.  Human rights  groups
        have  spread  inside  Cuba, demanding free speech, supervised multi
        party elections and the right to emigrate.  And returning  soldiers
        from  Angola  are finding that, after their longstanding sacrifice,
        only Castro's inner circle keeps the  power,  the  high  government
        positions and the good life and prestige that go with them.

             Positivists look towards the future, and all of the  above  is
        water under the bridge.  The real question should be:  what next?

             Castro is getting old.  Like all dictators,  he  has  no  heir
        apparent.   And Cuba is no longer a positive image for Soviet-style
        socialism  in  Latin  America.   In  addition,  Castro  refuses  to
        implement  perestroika  in  Cuba for very good reasons.  Unlike the
        new Soviet leaders, who can comfortably  blame  all  their  present
        ills  on  their  predecessors, Castro can blame no one but himself.
        He has been Cuba's autocratic ruler for 30 years!   And  all  these
        new factors add up to affect Cuba's immediate future.

             What are, then, some options to deal with the Cuban problem?

30 Years of Castro                                             Page 70
Jorge Luis Romeu


             One is to stay the course.  Castro will publicly blast the US.
        for its economic embargo.  He will play, again, his beloved role of
        little David fighting Goliath.  And he  will  thank  God  for  this
        blessing.  It will enable Castro to continue operating his run-down
        factories with his inept political commissars, well versed in  Marx
        and  Engels instead of in management science.  Castro will continue
        to cover-up his economic blunders under the embargo blanket and  to
        label as American stooges and CIA spies all those Cubans who oppose
        him or question his authority.   For  Castro,  staying  the  course
        represents stability and a well rehearsed situation.

             On the other hand, there is an alternative approach for  which
        Castro  is  not  quite prepared.  It constitutes, no doubt, a risky
        operation that will require skill  and  a  firm  hand  or  it  will
        backfire.   Castro  doesn't really want the US to stop its economic
        embargo -just to open it a little so he can  keep  on  running  his
        business  as usual.  Castro doesn't want a flux of US.  tourists in
        Cuba, bringing in the latest issues of  Newsweek  and  the  Spanish
        edition of the Miami Herald.  Without the embargo Castro would also
        have to buy new technology.  But then, he would have to employ real
        engineers  and  technicians  to run these new factories.  Political
        allegiance would  no  longer  suffice  for  a  technical  position.
        Professionals  like  myself,  formed  in  Cuban  universities under
        Castro's regime -not all trusted,  not  all  communists-  would  be
        required.   Such  situation  would  force  Castro to decide between
        stagnation within dogmatism or progress within pragmatism.   Castro
        would never let this catch-22 situation arise!

             Recent Cuban history backs up the above statement.   In  1977,
        Castro convened a group of exiles in Havana in what was called "The
        Dialogue".  Castro wanted to  split  the  exile  community  between
        those  opposed  to  an opening and those in favor of it.  Visits to
        Cuba were allowed for  the  exiles  and  about  100,000  took  this
        opportunity.

             Thus, in 1978 we saw back in Cuba those who had left ten years
        earlier and whom -we had been told- were washing dishes and running
        elevators in Miami.  They came, like Santa Clauses,  full  of  such
        goodies  as  fans,  ball  point  pens,  cheap watches, and panties,
        stirring up everything in the country.  These visits triggered  the
        invasion of the Peruvian Embassy in Havana, in 1979, by over 10,000
        Cubans  who  requested  political  assylum  there  and  the  Mariel
        Boatlift, a year later.

             With real opening, Castro would loose his tight  grip  on  the
        country.   He  would  gladly take just enough respite to strengthen
        his autocratic system.  But he has seen what has happened last week
        in Paraguay.

             After 34 years in power, President Stroessner  was  ousted  by
        his  own supporters.  Stroessner had become a burden for his system
        and, in order to survive, the system tossed him out and has started
        to  evolve.   Castro,  who  has  now the dubious honor of being the
        longest ruling dictator in the Western Hemisphere, doesn't want  to

30 Years of Castro                                             Page 71
Jorge Luis Romeu


        be  next  in  line.  Castro would follow the same fate for the same
        historical reasons...  and he knows it.

             Maybe a real political aperture is just what he needs!

30 Years of Castro                                             Page 72
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                      El Super: a Cuban or an American film?
                      ======================================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu

                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203

                                  (315) 476-8994



                            Submitted to Post Standard.

                             Published: November 1988.

El Super                                                       Page 73
J.L. Romeu


             As a film, El Super can be watched at  two  different  levels.
        First,  as  an  entertaining  light comedy in Spanish, with English
        subtitles.   Or  as  an  excellent  opportunity  to  penetrate  and
        understand the world of the Cuban-American experience.

             But, can El Super be considered a Cuban film?

             El  Super  was  shot  entirely  in  New  York   City,   by   a
        Cuban-American  crew, under a meek "cinema-verite" style budget and
        not in Havana, with  the  blessings  of  the  official  Cuban  Film
        Institute  (ICAIC).  Its theme is legitimately Cuban:  the story of
        a family of exiles struggling in the poor neighborhoods of New York
        City.

             The film tells the story of Roberto Amador Gonzalo, a 42 years
        old  former  Cuban  bus  conductor.   Amador  arrives in the States
        during the Freedom Flights (1965-1970)  with  his  young  wife  and
        little daughter.  He takes a job as the supervisor (El Super) of an
        old apartment house and for ten years struggles with three  things:
        his  job,  his  task  of  raising  a  family in a totally different
        society and his curse of still yearning for a land he  left  behind
        and to which he can never return.

             Finding that he can no longer stand the life in New York City,
        Gonzalo  plans  his  return  to  the closest thing to home:  Miami,
        Florida.

             The action occurs in an old, working class and  largely  Cuban
        section  of  the  city.   There,  one can live and die without ever
        having to speak English, eat a hamburger  or  listen  to  a  single
        rock-n-roll song.

             The main character is not a highly  educated  burgeois  nor  a
        wealthy  landowner.   His  neatly  kept  apartment,  and  the  many
        religious images displayed throughout  it,  gives  the  viewer  the
        feeling  El Super is an ordinary but independent-minded working man
        with a traditional background.

             He was forced to leave Cuba  by  the  drastic  changes  of  an
        atheistic  and  highly  politicized  regime.   Instead,  he  became
        attracted to the American system  where  "you  can  even  call  the
        President an SOB.  and nobody will care".

             But El  Super  deeply  misses  his  homeland  -"where  is  the
        sunshine?";  his  family  -"my  old  lady passed away, and I wasn't
        there to see it!"; and his friends -"Who would say that I,  Roberto
        Amador Gonzalo, at 42 would start my third life."

             Two family friends are presented in the film:  one Cuban,  one
        Puerto   Rican.    The   Cuban   is  a  burned-out,  ex-Bay-of-Pigs
        expeditionary who sees life through an anti-communist  prism.   The
        Puerto  Rican  provides the contrast between Cubans and the rest of
        the hispanic groups.  He is a sure and close friend  of  El  Super.
        Yet the Puerto Rican confides to him:  "I have never told you about

El Super                                                       Page 74
J.L. Romeu


        our problems; about Albizu Campos, nor the Ponce Killings."

             To this, El Super replies:  "Sure!  But if you want to go back
        tomorrow, you just go to the Eastern counter and buy a ticket!"

             This is the message of El Super:  SOME PEOPLE HAVE CHOSEN  NOT
        TO  GO BACK.  THE POSSIBILITY IS ALWAYS THERE FOR THEM, BUT NOT FOR
        US.  It draws the line between an immigrant and a political exile.

             Gonzalo dreams of moving to Miami, to Hialeah!   Any  one  who
        has  walked  through  Miami's Hialeah section and La Lisa, a Havana
        neigborhood, can surely  take  one  for  the  other.   Miami!   The
        closest that Cuban-Americans can get to home...

             Gonzalo's dream comes true when he receives a  letter  with  a
        job  offer.   "The  Visa!" he shouts, reading the letter, in direct
        reference to the American Visas, so long awaited for in Cuba.   "La
        Visa"  represented  El  Super's  possibility of a transition to the
        Promised Land ...  now in Hialeah!

             In the Farewell Party scene, we find again the  theme  of  the
        separation of friends and family:  an experience all the guests had
        bitterly lived through.

             The film ends with  El  Super  looking  at  the  boiler:   "la
        Boila".   It  represents  everything he hates:  the cold, the snow,
        separation, loneliness...  El Super is not going back home, but  is
        getting the best surrogate he can humanly find!

             Yes, El Super is a Cuban film because  everything:   director,
        crew,  actors  and  theme  are  all  genuinely  Cuban.   Just that,
        precisely, due to  its  theme,  El  Super  couldn't  happen  inside
        Castro's Cuba.

             To its Director, Leon Ichaso, we say:   "Hey,  buddy,  thanks.
        You did a great job!"

Havana.                                                        Page 75
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                      Havana:
                                      =======


                              The Film and The Story.
                              =======================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217
                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post Standard




                             Date: January 1st, 1991.




                           Published: January 15, 1991.

Havana.                                                        Page 76
J. L. Romeu


             This week I couldn't resist the temptation of viewing  Havana,
        the new Robert Redford film about the fall of Batista's government.
        It was not the good acting nor the tender love story but  the  need
        to  see  the city where I grew up and my children were born and the
        way in which the fall of Cuba's previous dictator was told.

             It was very refreshing to find that the  film's  ambience  was
        unusually  accurate,  thanks to the collaboration between producers
        and the Cuban authorities.  Daily life thirty years ago is captured
        from  the  first  scene  of  Havana's  "Malecon", its long seashore
        drive, the ferries crisscrossing the bay and the  Prado  Boulevard.
        And  even  in  the  rest of the film, most of which was shot in the
        Dominican Republic, the quality of the ambience comes through.   In
        many small details:  bottles of "Hatuey" beer or packages of "Pinos
        Nuevos" bread.  Only the trained eye  can  notice  that  "Autobuses
        Modernos"  buses  shown were old GM American coaches instead of the
        original British Leyland used in the fifties.  Also, several native
        actors  played  leading  roles  and  their  bilingual  and seasoned
        performances  added   much   realism   and   quality.    But   this
        collaboration  also allowed the introduction of several subtile but
        clear political messages.

             The  first  message  comes   through   the   overall   corrupt
        environment  which  portrays  Havana,  a  capital of over a million
        inhabitants.  The city had, in addition to  bars,  brothels  and  a
        handfull  of  American  casinos shown over and again throughout the
        film,  several  museums,  symphonic  orchestra,   theaters,   three
        universities and many offices, modern factories and quality stores.
        The unorthodox amenities were for those tourists who did not  enjoy
        our beautifull beaches and natural scenery.

             There were certainly many unfortunate ills that  thousands  of
        Cuban  men  and  women,  who  put  very  long hours in their shops,
        offices or sugar cane fields, were working hard  to  redress.   And
        many   thousands   of   beautiful   women,  employed  as  teachers,
        secretaries, clerks or simple house maids, helped  with  their  low
        wages to support a modest but honest and loving household.

             The second message, short but intentional, was  given  by  the
        Cuban  journalist.   In one scene, he laments being a member of the
        corrupted and weak middle class, condemned to escape to  Miami.   A
        review  of  the Cuban history shows how the revolution of 1959 was,
        essentially the endeavour of the middle class.  And many of today's
        Politburo members are still of professional extraction.  Of course,
        Castro needs to justify and belittle the exodous of over a  million
        Cubans,  triggered  by his delivery of our democratic revolution to
        marxist totalitarianism.

             The third message  is  yet  another  consequence  of  Castro's
        guilt.   In  several  scenes,  for  example  in the hanguing of the
        peasants, some sickle and hammer symbols are shown.  The historical
        fact  is  that  none  of  the organizations in the struggle against
        Batista was communist.  But Castro, in his quest  for  a  permanent
        place  in  history,  needs  to  conceal  how he misled thousands of

Havana.                                                        Page 77
J. L. Romeu


        idealistic young men to their death under a false flag.  But  this,
        history will not forgive.

             The last message is delivered in the scene with Meyer  Lansky,
        the   infamous  Miami  maffioso.   Lansky  belittles  Batista,  his
        government and the whole Cuban nation as a banana republic, created
        and controlled by the Americans.  Batista, a crooked politician who
        would not hesitate to order someone killed, was tougher than  Meyer
        Lansky and had a larger and richer organization.  But Batista never
        sent Cuban troops to Korea, nor  Guatemala  or  Lebanon,  following
        Eisenhower's  orders,  while  Castro's  troops did fight in Angola,
        Ethiopia and Siria,  to  advance  and  support  Breshnev's  foreign
        policy.

             Havana is a love story  reminiscent  of  Casablanca.   Without
        being  consciously  ill  intentioned,  this Hollywood film portrays
        very negatively yet another Latin country.  And this  doesn't  help
        improve the existing stereotypes about Hispanics.

             Americans of Hispanic  descent  cannot  feel  proud  of  their
        heritage  when  their  peers and the countries of their forefathers
        are portrayed as corrupt banana  republics  populated  with  second
        rate   people.    And   in   a  democratic  nation,  such  negative
        stereotyping can effect the vote of segments of the electorate and,
        hence,  its foreign policy.  Careless portrayal of nations can also
        hurt the feelings of their people and affect foreign relations.

             Yes, Havana is entertaining.  But unlike in the film, the real
        Cuba  like  the  real  Latin America, is full of good, hard working
        people.  Of people who try hard to do their best  with  their  lot,
        the  same  as  we do, here.  Even when it is not always recorded in
        the Hollywood films.

Mariel                                                         Page 78
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                      Mariel:
                                      =======



                                The Cuban Dunkerke
                                 =================







                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                          Submitted to: The Post Standard


                                Date: May 13, 1990.


                             Published: June 28, 1990.

Mariel                                                         Page 79
J. L. Romeu


             Ten years ago, on Mother's Day,  and  at  the  height  of  the
        Mariel  Boatlift, we left our Cuban homeland for the United States.
        Two weeks later we arrived in Syracuse, where we settled  and  have
        lived ever since.

             We have come a long way from our Hawley Ave.   appartment  and
        our  first job in one of the local foundries.  For that, we happily
        thank God and our many Hispanic and American friends.   In  return,
        we  have  worked  hard  to  keep  the  delicate balance between the
        respect and gratitude dues to this blessed land  and  its  generous
        people, and our commitment to those of us left behind.

             But, what was this Mariel Boatlift,  an  event  that,  perhaps
        many  wont remember?  Over 120,000 Cubans came, accross the Florida
        Straits, in all sorts of boats, on a stampede  that  preceeded  tha
        fall  of  communism  in Eastern Europe by ten years!  Maybe our own
        story may help you remember it and understand it better.

             In the early 1980, many Cubans were pretty upset.  For over  a
        year  now,  our  relatives  exiled  in the US.  had been allowed to
        return for a one-week visit at a $1000.00 price tag.  They came  to
        Havana  by  the  tens  of  thousands,  like Santa Clauses, to visit
        parents and relatives they hadn't seen in over a decade.

             The Cuban government had  cleverly  allowed  these  visits  to
        obtain  some  badly needed hard currency.  But the Cuban people now
        saw how all these "traitors' who were supposedly "scrubbing floors,
        washing  dishes  and  operating elevators" in Miami could, not only
        travel freely, but also have milk for breakfast and  put  sugar  in
        their coffee -or simply have coffee!

             Shortly after these visits started, people began breaking into
        Latin  American legations in Havana, seeking political assylum.  In
        one of these break-ins, at the Peruvian Embassy, one of the  guards
        killed  another guard in a cross-fire.  The Cuban government blamed
        those trying to  get  into  the  embassy  for  the  killings.   The
        Peruvian  Ambassador  refused  to hand them back to Cuba and Castro
        withdrew the Cuban guard from the Embassy.

             The word spread and, from many provinces near and far,  people
        came  and entered the Embassy.  In two days there were ten thousand
        and people kept comming.  The Cuban government, then, sent the mobs
        armed  with  clubs,  chains  and pipes and the special forces.  The
        Embassy was closed down.

             The problem, now, was what to do with those already  in?   How
        could the Cuban government curb the international embarrasment this
        situation had created?

             Fidel Castro, again playing on the strong  Cuban  family  ties
        announced,  in  a speech, that anyone who would come to Mariel on a
        boat could take their relatives back with them.

Mariel                                                         Page 80
J. L. Romeu


             At this stage, our sister, a local Syracuse college professor,
        flew  to  Key  West, got on a shrimp trawler along with seven other
        families and salied to Mariel.

             For a year, now, we were stranded in Cuba.  For, in  spite  of
        having  valid  passports and visas from Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia
        and US, we were not allowed to  leave.   Our  longstanding  writing
        habits  had caused us some problems with the Cuban security forces,
        who had sequestered our documents.

             Our sister arrived in Mariel, and stayed there  with  hundreds
        and maybe thousands of other small, medium and large boats for days
        and days, hoping to get us finally out.

             One morning, one of the  members  of  her  expedition  called.
        "She  doesn't  have  the  courage  to  call  you",  he  said.  "The
        government says that, for every one we want to take with  us,  they
        will put six on the boat." There was a silence.  "The thing is", he
        concluded, "that there is not enough room to take all  your  family
        and  I  need  that  you give me a list with your selection, for the
        case we can only take one, then for two, three..."

             Maybe, the government may have thought it wouldn't  look  good
        if  some  people  with  valid passports and visas had to leave on a
        boat.  They had, before, thought it wouldn't look  good  to  put  a
        writer  in  prison  for  publishing an inconvenient little piece of
        fiction, abroad.  They gave us back our passports and put us on the
        next  plane  to Mexico.  Our brothers in law took our places on the
        boat.  The rest is history.

             With the Mariel Boatlift, Castro thought he would somehow cast
        a  shadow on the Cuban political exile.  For, some of the people he
        put in, were mental patients, or inmates right  from  prison.   And
        some others were black, poor and ill-educated.

             Black or white, rich or poor, highly  or  poorly  trained  and
        even  good or bad, we were all Cubans.  By expecting to embarass us
        Castro only showed that, under all his marxist rhetoric, he remains
        a  racist  and  a classist.  After Mariel, it became plain that not
        only white, or highly  trained,  middle  class  or  wealthy  Cubans
        disliked the regime.

             Yes, Mariel in 1980, like Dunkerke  in  1940,  was  a  massive
        exodus  of apparent loosers.  But, if history repeats itself we may
        well see a political Normandy not too far away in the Cuban future.
        And pluralism will flourish again.

Multirracial Society                                           Page 81
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                              Multirracial Societies:
                              =======================


                             Is There a Single Model?
                             ========================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                          Submitted to: The Post Standard


                               Date: March 8, 1992.

                            Published: April 7th, 1992.

Multirracial Society                                           Page 82
J. L. Romeu


             "Hey, guy, come down!"

             The fellow at the bottom of the ladder was my childhood friend
        Orlando  Fernandez, who was black.  He lived accross the street, in
        our Eastwood-like neighboorhood  of  Almendares,  in  Havana,  ever
        since  I  could  remember.  More so, I can distincly recall the day
        his family moved in.  Orlando insisted in climbing to "my" tree, so
        we  had  a  big  fight.   His  father, a liberal professional and a
        mason, like my father was, intervened and forced us to make  peace.
        We were good buddies ever since.

             In Cuba, the year is divided into two  seasons:   drought  and
        rain.  For us, kids, it had many more:  the top season and the kite
        season, the yoyo, marbles, skating, biking  and  baseball  seasons,
        and many more...

             Orlando and I always enjoyed them together, playing at  either
        one's  home  or  in  the  street,  with the rest of the kids in the
        block.  We competed, we disagreed, we fought and called each  other
        names  (even  four  letter  word names!) without giving it a second
        thought as to whether it was "politically correct"  or  not.   But,
        all was done in good faith and it helped that Orlando had never had
        to ride in the back of a bus, drink from a special  water  fountain
        or go to a segretated school.

             At the start of the Cuban revolution,  Orlando's  father,  who
        spoke  several  languages, got a high position in the Foreign Trade
        Ministry.  Shortly after, he sent Orlando to study  in  the  Soviet
        Union.   He spent several years there, went to College, and was now
        a big manager in the Ministry of Agriculture, with a government car
        and all.

             "Hey, guy!  What are you up to now?" he said again as  I  came
        down the ladder with my brush and paint can.  "I have been watching
        you, working around the house for SIX weeks  now.   And  NOBODY  in
        this country gets that much vacation!".

             "They let me go..."  I  said.   He  looked  me  all  over  and
        scratched  his  beard.   He said:  "Do you want to work with me, in
        Agriculture?" "I am not revolutionary", I answered.  "I  know  that
        -but that is not what I asked you."

             To make a long story short, I started working as  statistician
        for  the  Ministry  of  Agriculture  a week later, and worked there
        until I left Cuba in 1980.

             The story of our frienship was not very different from that of
        other  kids  of  working or middle class extraction in Cuba, in the
        fifties.  I won't say that there were no racial differences in Cuba
        nor  that  the  people  were  "color  blind".  But, in the 70 years
        elapsed since the abolition of slavery,  in  1880,  Cuba  had  made
        large progress toward an integrated society.

Multirracial Society                                           Page 83
J. L. Romeu


             Blacks slaves were brought to Cuba since the early 1500's,  to
        work  for  their  masters,  just  as had previously occurred to the
        Greeks with the Romans, or to the Jews with the Egyptians.  In  the
        early  1800's blacks constituted a third of the population.  But of
        these, almost half were already freed and  owned  small  farms  and
        shops.

             Spain used the race issue (and the close  example  of  Haiti's
        slave  revolt)  as a political weapon to curbe Cuban's independence
        movement in the first half of the 19th century.  But  in  1868,  at
        the  start  of the War of Independence, Cuban revolutionaries freed
        their slaves and let them join the army.  With this action,  Cubans
        cut the last hold Spain had on them.

             Many black men, free and slave, distinguished themselves among
        the  officer  corps.  General Antonio Maceo was second in the chain
        of command and Juan G.  Gomez, a black  lawyer,  was  the  personal
        delegate  of  Marti,  the  independence movement leader.  After the
        war, Gomez, along with many other black Cubans, held high positions
        in  the  government, including his lifelong Senate chair.  In 1933,
        the head of the army was already black.  In 1940 the president  was
        black.   Many  of  these men were of mixed race, which is often the
        case in Latin America.

             In the professional and  economic  spheres,  20%  of  doctors,
        lawyers  and  teachers  were black, as reported in the 1943 census.
        The population was then about  30%  non  white.   The  primary  and
        secondary  schools and the access to the University was open to all
        races.  However, on the average, blacks were  poorer  than  whites.
        And  since  education  was  better  in private schools, blacks as a
        group were still less educated and occupied a lesser  socioeconomic
        level.   In  the  uppermost social and economic levels, blacks were
        still discriminated against.  Separate  social  clubs  existed  for
        affluent  whites,  blacks and mulattoes.  However, all professional
        societies, churches and lodges were completely integrated.

             How was such racial harmony attained  in  so  short  time,  in
        Cuba?   It  was  a  long and engaging process for, both, whites and
        blacks:  it takes two to tango.  And one  of  much  good  will  and
        mutual  accomodation.   A process that works only if both sides are
        really willing to breach the gap.

             In England,  a  thousand  years  ago,  Normans  conquered  the
        Saxons.  I wonder how many Britts, today, care what is their ethnic
        origin.  In Yugoslavia, on the other hand, Serbs  and  Croats  have
        been  constantly  fighting with each other, for one thousand years.
        England is a world economic and political power;  Yugoslavia  is  a
        mess.

             Maybe we could borrow old Ben Franklin's revolutionary slogan,
        apply  it  to  the multicultural and multirracial context, and say:
        either we hang together or we hang separately.

Our Man in Havana                                              Page 84
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                        Mijail Gorgachev's visit to Castro:
                        ===================================

                                Our Man in Havana?
                                ==================



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu.



                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203

                                  (315) 476-8994

                                 April 1st, 1989.


                                   ___ ________ _____________

                      Submitted to The Syracuse Post-Standard


                            Published: April 5th, 1989.

Our Man in Havana                                              Page 85
Jorge Luis Romeu


             Mijail  Gorbachev,  the  Soviet  Communist  Party  leader,  is
        visiting  Havana,  Cuba, this week.  He is there trying to persuade
        Fidel Castro to open up his system.  That is,  trying  to  convince
        Castro to implement some sort of Perestroika in Cuba.

             Mr.  Gorbachev may suggest Castro allow some form  of  private
        enterprise,  as  is  currently  occurring in the Soviet Union.  For
        example, Castro may allow the farmers to sell their produce in  the
        markets or the plumbers and electricians to work on their own after
        their daily shift.  But Castro, himself, tried something like  this
        in the early 1980's, just after the political debacle of the Mariel
        Boatlift, and it didn't work.  That is, it worked much too well for
        some of the enterprising farmers and plumbers, who were getting too
        rich and setting a bad example.   Then,  Castro  simply  wrote  the
        whole experiment off and started the current process of "correction
        of errors" -the antithesis of Soviet Perestroika.

             Mr.  Gorbachev knows of this very well.  And also  that  Fidel
        Castro  is  a  tough  cookie.   In  the  early 1960's, after Nikita
        Khruchov  removed  the  soviet  missiles  from  Cuba  without  even
        consulting  Havana, Castro put in jail most of the "Old Guard", the
        old Cuban Communist Party top bosses.  Castro then let  the  Soviet
        Government  know that they were better off putting up with him than
        risking loosing Cuba altogether.

             But Castro also knows well that Mr.  Gorbachev,  in  turn,  is
        also  a very tough cookie.  That Gorbachov has succeeded in turning
        around the Communist Party's political strategy, in  spite  of  the
        resistance of the conservatives in the Soviet Politburo.  Gorbachev
        is convinced that communism, to remain an issue in the last  decade
        of  the  twentieth  century,  has to evolve and acquire a new face.
        Hence, Gorbachev has to persuade  Fidel  Castro  to  implement,  if
        nothing else, a limited promotional perestroika.

             But, to be fair, Castro's position is very different from that
        of  Gorbachev's.  The new Soviet leader can afford to criticize the
        errors committed in the past because the perpetrators were  others,
        and  they are very dead.  Castro, in turn, could never do this.  He
        has no one to blame but himself.  He has run  Cuba  as  a  personal
        fiefdom  for  thirty  years, with a tight group of friends, who are
        very much alive and constitute the backbone of his political power.

             On the other hand, Gorvachev perfectly well  knows  that  Cuba
        has  performed, for thirty years, three important functions for the
        Soviet Union.

             First, Cuba has been an efficient Public Relations bureau  for
        Soviet  communism,  in  Latin America and the Third World.  Through
        Cuba, the Soviets have introduced their product to this new  market
        and have obtained foot holds in them, from time to time.

             Second, Cuba has acted as a surrogate for  the  Soviet  Union,
        both  politically  and  militarily,  when it was not convenient for
        them to act directly.  Cuba has been  an  active  member  of  Third

Our Man in Havana                                              Page 86
Jorge Luis Romeu


        World  organizations,  supporting  the  soviet  block interests for
        years.  And, for  a  term,  Cuba  even  presided  the  Non-Alligned
        Movement!   If  fighting  Soviet  political battles weren't enough,
        Cuba has also sent its soldiers  (Angola,  Ethiopia)  where  Soviet
        troops would have never been able to set foot without provoking the
        military retaliation of the Western nations.

             Finally,  if  things  really  ever  got  so  bad,  Cuba  would
        represent  a  beach  head  behind  the  enemy lines or, at least, a
        diversionist object to throw  at  the  U.S.   to  gain  time  while
        fortifying   soviet  military  positions  in  the  homeland.   This
        provides a valuable bargaining chip in US-Soviet relations.

             In  exchange  for  these  very  tangible  services,  Cuba  has
        received  during  thirty  years  a generous subsidy from the Soviet
        Union.  Some say about eight million dollars a day!

             Why, then, would Mr.  Gorbachev risk a heads-on collision with
        his Tropical friend?

             Precisely because the first and most important  function  that
        Cuba  performs,  that  of public relations stunt, is not working at
        all!

             Cuban, under Castro, represents an outdated model  at  a  time
        when  the  Hungarians have allowed the organization of (restricted)
        independent political parties,  when  the  Polish  have  created  a
        Senate  of  freely  elected representatives and have recognized the
        Solidarity Trade Union, and when even the Soviets  have  elected  a
        Patriarch to their new Parliament.

             In a decade when, even Latin America  countries  like  Brazil,
        Argentina,  Uruguay,  Peru,  Ecuador,  and now Paraguay and shortly
        Chile have moved (or will  move)  towards  a  pluralistic  form  of
        government,  it  is  inconsistent  that  Cuba  remains a bastion of
        Stalinism.  This will not attract the attention nor the interest of
        Latin  American  masses.   And  the image portrayed by Cuba will be
        much more damaging than beneficial for Soviet propaganda.

             Yes, Mr.  Gorbachev is in Havana trying to make Castro  comply
        with  the  Human  Rights  conventions  and trying to liberalize the
        Cuban economy and the social structures,  at  least  to  a  minimal
        level.

             Then, has Soviet leader Gorbachev become "Our Man in  Havana"?
        No, he has not.  But, maybe, in a way, he may very well be...

The Tip of the Iceberg                                         Page 87
Jorge Luis Romeu


                                         .







                              The Tip of the Iceberg.
                              =======================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu



                                   201 Rugby Rd.
                                Syracuse, NY 13203

                                  (315) 476-8994


                                       ___ ____ ________

                          Submitted to The Post Standard

                                  July 9th, 1989.


                            Published: July 14th, 1989.

The Tip of the Iceberg                                         Page 88
Jorge Luis Romeu


             The arrest, trial, sentencing and execution  on  drug  dealing
        charges, of Cuban General Arnaldo Ochoa has made the front pages in
        Miami.  But there are strong reasons for it to be  considered  hard
        news anywhere.

             General Ochoa, 58, was decorated by Castro in 1984 as a  "Hero
        of  the Cuban Revolution".  Ochoa commanded the Cuban expeditionary
        forces in Ethiopia and was considered the architect  of  the  Cuban
        military  victories  there.  Later on, he commanded Cuban forces in
        Angola and in Nicaragua.  And, until last month, was third  in  the
        chain of command in the Cuban army.

             But now, and with six other high ranking army and intelligence
        officers, General Ochoa has been indicted and sentenced for setting
        up and operating a smuggling ring that introduced Colombian cocaine
        in  the U.S.  These operations had been repeatedly denounced in the
        past by U.S.   authorities  and  repeatedly  denied  by  the  Cuban
        government.  It now results that they were true after all.

             Two weeks ago, the Cuban government apparently found  out  and
        arrested  the mentioned officers.  A military "High Court of Honor"
        was organized to look at the problem.  As a result, Ochoa  and  all
        his  accomplices were stripped off their military ranks, medals and
        government and party positions and  sentenced  to  death,  or  long
        imprisonment terms.

             But  the  substance  of  the  problem  doesn't  lie  in  these
        sensational  and  highly publicized events but in another important
        one:  Was it really possible, as Castro's  government  now  claims,
        that  such  a  large,  complex  and long lived operation could have
        taken place in a tightly controlled country like Cuba  without  the
        knowledge -and acquiescence- of the highest power circles?

             There are, at least, three theories  to  explain  them.   They
        address  the  situation  behind  this drug affair and consider them
        only the visible manifestations of the real underlying problem that
        caused  them.   We  will call them the "naive", the "hard-line" and
        the "pragmatic" explanations, respectively.

             The "naive" approach suggests that the  current  drug  busting
        events  in  Havana are nothing but another proof of the "good will"
        of the Cuban government.  Castro was  completely  ignorant  of  the
        drug  traffick  and  he  ordered the crack down as soon as he found
        out.  Consequently, Castro's behaviour should  be  encouraged  with
        better economic and political relations between Cuba and the U.S.

             This  simple  explanation  leaves  an   important   unanswered
        question.   How, for over two years, Colombian drug dealers entered
        and left the Cuban ports, airstrips and  used  sophisticated  Cuban
        intelligence  reports  without  the knowledge and complicity of the
        highest Cuban authorities?

The Tip of the Iceberg                                         Page 89
Jorge Luis Romeu


             The second "hard-line" explanation states that the  real  ring
        leader and the only one to blame is Fidel Castro, himself.  Castro,
        after years of accusations, was no  longer  able  to  maintain  his
        cover-up and was forced to acknowledge that he was trafficking with
        drugs.  Then, Castro found some "convenient" scapegoats  to  blame,
        as  he has traditionally done with all his other previous political
        and economic mistakes during the last 30 years.

             To the supporters of this approach, we remind that Castro,  an
        astute  operator,  has  effectively  remained  in power for over 30
        years.  He is  not  so  clumsy.   And  the  sacrifice  of  a  close
        associate as Arnaldo Ochoa is not done without undue cause.  Other,
        more expendable, scape goats could have easily been found.

             There is yet a third, pragmatic, more sophisticated  approach.
        It  supports  the  idea  that  Castro  was  preasured by his Soviet
        patrons to drop the inefficient Latin American guerrilla operation.
        It was costing too much and yielding too little.  But Castro didn't
        want to stop it.

             Then, General Ochoa, a loyal and old  comrade,  suggested  the
        drug  trafficking  scheme  as  an  efficient  solution with several
        benefits.  It would provide funds to  support  the  guerrillas  and
        other operations in Latin America as well as some badly needed hard
        cash in Cuba to develop tourism in the island.  All this hard  cash
        would  come  from  the  drug dealers which would gladly pay for the
        services rendered in  Cuba,  as  they  smuggled  their  drugs  from
        Colombia  to  the U.S.  Finally, the spreading of drugs in the U.S.
        would contribute to the "moral decay" of capitalism.  Convinced  by
        all  this,  Castro  conveniently  looked  the other way and let his
        people run the operation for him for all this time.

             But maybe there arose a small and unexpected  problem.   Maybe
        Gen.   Ochoa,  a  soviet trained field commander, well liked by his
        seasoned troops after many years under fire in Ethiopia, Angola and
        Nicaragua, was getting too powerful.  Maybe Ochoa's ideas about the
        Cuban future were more in tune with soviet  perestroika  than  with
        Castro's  return  to  the past via the process of "rectification of
        errors".  Maybe Castro, who is getting old, thought that Ochoa  was
        becoming a potential threat to his personal authority.

             Hence, by laying out in the open the drug traffic and  blaming
        Ochoa  of  it,  Castro would gain in several ways.  First, he would
        rid himself of this real or imagined foe and send a  clear  message
        to  others  like  him in Cuba:  Castro is the boss.  Then, he could
        use its timely disclosure very addroitely as another P.R.  chip  in
        the US-Cuba rapprochment game.

             If this last approach is close to the truth, then getting  rid
        of Ochoa is only the first of very interesting events to come.

             In Portugal, in 1974, the gerontocracy in power was ousted  by
        young army colonels.  They had forged close ties under the bullets,
        during the colonial wars in Africa.  And  Castro,  knowlegeable  of

The Tip of the Iceberg                                         Page 90
Jorge Luis Romeu


        this,  may want to steer clear of the same problem.  But, by trying
        to avoit this pitfall, Castro may well fall in another  worse  one.
        For  a  witch-hunt  among  young Cuban army officers may only force
        them to outst Castro first.

             Maybe what we have just seen in Havana, with Ochoa's trial and
        execution  is  barely  the  tip of the iceberg.  If so, it may well
        also be the beginning of the end!

Bay of Pigs                                                    Page 91
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                   Bay of Pigs:
                                   ============


                              30 Years of Reckoning.
                              ======================





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                       Submitted to: Syracuse Post Standard


                               Date: April 15, 1991.



                            Published: April 18, 1991.

Bay of Pigs                                                    Page 92
J. L. Romeu


             Thirty years ago this month, 1400 anti-Castro  exiles  trained
        and  armed by the CIA, landed in a swampy beach south of Cuba.  For
        three days and nights they fought Castro's regular army and popular
        militia.  Finally, on April 19th, the remaining 1100 surrendered in
        what was to be known, in the U.S., as the Bay of Pigs  fiasco  and,
        in Cuba, as the invasion of Playa Giron.

             For many, the Bay of Pigs brings back memories  from  newsreel
        scenes  showing lines of anti-Castro exiles with their hands in the
        air and their weapons piled up on the ground.  For those of  us  in
        Cuba,   these  memories  include  their  public  interrogation,  on
        National TV, by the Cuban  authorities,  with  lively  interchanges
        between some of them and Castro himself.

             But, when we seek an explanation for the Bay of  Pigs  events,
        we  have to go back in time, before the landing or even the moment,
        early in 1961, when the first exiles arrived in  the  CIA  training
        camps in Guatemala.  To understand what happened we have to go back
        to Havana, on January of 1959...

             Twenty six months  before  the  Bay  of  Pigs  fiasco,  Castro
        entered  Havana  at the head of a Liberal revolution, promising the
        Cuban people free elections in 18 months and a return to  democracy
        and  pluralism.   Instead, Castro started an accelerated program to
        build a totalitarian socialist state.  He eliminated the press  and
        the  political  parties and took over the banks, the foreign trade,
        the bigger factories and the large and middle landholdings.

             In addition, Castro banned all opposition  to  his  government
        and  started  committing  dissenters to jail, or forcing them to go
        abroad or underground.  The only voices allowed were of  those  who
        supported and praised his regime.

             As a result, Cuba split into two  strongly  opposed  political
        camps  and,  without  the option of a civil opposition, anti-Castro
        Cubans started organizing for civil war.  At this stage,  President
        Eisenhower  authorized the CIA to provide support to several exiled
        groups in Miami and the Cuban Council, headed  by  a  former  Cuban
        prime minister was created.

             However, two costly tactical errors were made.  The first  was
        to  assume  that  a huge popular uprising against Castro would take
        place if a force landed in Cuba.  The second, was to  reassure  the
        Cuban  exiles  that  American air support would be provided to them
        and with this help, they would be in Havana in a matter of days.

             Meanwhile, in Cuba, the political situation worsened  by  day.
        By  April of 1961, even the private catholic schools had been taken
        over by the government and guerrillas were overtly operating in all
        the six provinces.

             The CIA then  gave  the  order  to  launch  the  Bay  of  Pigs
        operation.   On  April  15th, old WWII B-26 bombers manned by Cuban
        crews flew from Nicaragua to attack military  airfields  in  Havana

Bay of Pigs                                                    Page 93
J. L. Romeu


        and  two other cities, to destroy Castro's air force on the ground.
        I can clearly remember the bombs exploding  and  the  anti-aircraft
        guns  firing,  less  than  a  mile  away from our home, in Havana's
        Columbia military airport.  As I  can  remember  the  surprise  and
        frustration  among  Cuban  underground operatives, ignorant of such
        operation taking place.  Some say that the underground movement was
        too  split  and penetrated by Castro's security forces to be useful
        or reliable.  Others say that Miami exiles did not  want  to  share
        power with the internal forces.

             In any case, Castro launched a massive round up  of  political
        dissidents  and,  in less than 48 hours, over 100,000 men and women
        were put in concentration camps.  Then, Castro  declared,  publicly
        and  for  the  first  time  since  his  arrival  to power two years
        earlier, that socialism was his true political goal.

             It was now too late to react.   The  internal  opposition  had
        been  broken.  And in the Bay of Pigs, Castro's remaining air force
        brought down all the exiles' B-26 in the first 24 hours of  combat.
        The  recent  Irak  defeat  has shown the extraordinary advantage of
        owning the skies, and Castro's forces made  excellent  use  of  it.
        The  invaders'  fleet, with all the water, food and ammunition, was
        sent to the bottom of the  Caribbean.   And  the  exiles,  thirsty,
        hungry,  encircled  and outnumbered 30-to-one, without the promised
        American air cover, surrendered in three days.

             Thirty years have  passed  but  the  Bay  of  Pigs  remains  a
        controversial   element  of,  both,  the  Cuban  and  the  American
        politics.  Some think it was a lost opportunity;  others,  that  it
        was a senseless mistake.  And for Castro, the Bay of Pigs remains a
        useful weapon for his internal and foreign propaganda and policy.

Cuba After Castro.                                             Page 94
J. L. Romeu


                                         .







                                    Aftermath:
                                    ==========



                                Cuba After Castro:
                                ==== ===== =======





                                 Jorge Luis Romeu


                                   P.O.Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217


                                  (315) 476-8994



                                    Final Copy



                         Submitted to: The Post-Standard.


                              Date: October 10, 1990.

Cuba After Castro.                                             Page 95
J. L. Romeu


             The recent invasion of Kuwait has concentrated  our  attention
        in the Middle East.  The similarities between Saddam Hussein's Irak
        and Castro's Cuba go beyond both being staunch dictatorial regimes.
        But  the fact that Cuba lies 90 miles away from our shores makes it
        a special case.

             Like Saddam, Castro maintains  control  by  a  combination  of
        providing  social  programs and uprooting any sign of opposition or
        dissent.  Like Saddam, Castro was  closely  allied  to  the  Soviet
        Union  and  received  ample soviet military and economic aid.  Like
        Saddam, Castro had an exceedingly large  army  engaged  in  foreign
        wars:   in Angola, Ethiopia and Nicaragua.  And like Saddam, Castro
        now faces with concern how his huge army sits iddle at home, posing
        a threat to his autocratic rule.

             Saddam found a shrewd  solution  to  this  problem:   invading
        Kuwait  -which  keeps his army busy outside Irak.  Castro has found
        only poor excuses to execute several of his best field  commanders,
        like  Arnaldo Ochoa, and to throw in jail his Minister of Interior.
        However,  after  the   consolidation   of   Perestroika,   Castro's
        usefulness  for the Soviets has decreased, but not the high cost of
        the Cuban operation.  And the global move towards pluralism, in the
        past months, has negatively affected Castro's international image.

             This summer, for example, many Cubans  sought  refuge  in  the
        Embassies  of  Spain, Checoslovakia, Italy, Canada and the American
        Interest Office in Havana.  Following  the  penetration,  by  Cuban
        police,  of  the  Spanish  legation  in  pursuit of these political
        refugees, relations between  Madrid  and  Havana  strained  to  the
        limit.  Castro's visit to Brazil, for the inauguration of President
        Collor,  proved  even  worse.   Several  heads  of  state  publicly
        suggested he should hold free elections.  As a result, Castro shied
        away  from  attending  the  inauguration  of   Peruvian   president
        Fugimori.

             The internal Cuban situation isn't any better.  In addition to
        the  problems  in  the  armed  forces,  already mentioned, there is
        growing discontent and civil dissent.  Several groups,  among  them
        the well known Cuban Human Rights Committee, are alive and well, in
        spite of several  of  their  members  being  serving  time.   Their
        leader, Prof.  Arcos Bergnes, has launched an open proposal for all
        Cuban political groups, government and opposition, in Cuba  and  in
        exile,  to  hold  a  meeting  to start moving the country back into
        pluralism.  For this proposal,  and  his  previous  work  in  Human
        Rights, he has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.

             Cuban exiles have also been particularly active, in a new  and
        interesting  way.   The  most  important  organization is the Cuban
        American National Foundation (CANF), one of  the  oldest  and  most
        active  Cuban  exile group in the US.  Its largest success has been
        the creation of Radio Marti, possibly the most effective  operation
        in  favor  of the restablishment of pluralism in Cuba.  Radio Marti
        (which can be heard 24 hours a day in  the  25,  31  and  49  meter
        bands)  provides Cubans alternative sources of news, entertainement

Cuba After Castro.                                             Page 96
J. L. Romeu


        and cultural programming thus allowing them the opportunity to pick
        and  chose.   Radio  Marti  is  known  to  have  a large and steady
        audience there.

             In addition to the conservative CANF, several new groups  have
        appeared,  showing  that  opposition  to  Castro  comes from a wide
        spectrum of the  political  rainbow.   The  Center  for  the  Cuban
        Democracy,  founded  by  a  Miami sociology professor and the Cuban
        Liberal Union, founded by in Spain by a well known Cuban writer and
        journalist,  are  two of several new centrist and liberal political
        organizations.  They are also supporting the initiative for  Castro
        to  hold  internationally  supervised  and  multi-party  elections,
        following the Chilean and Nicaraguan models.  It is  unlikely  that
        Castro accepts to hold free elections in Cuba, especially after the
        defeats of Nicaragua's Sandinistas and the  communists  in  Eastern
        Europe.

             However, there exists, momentarily, a  window  of  opportunity
        provided  by  the  restructuring  taking place in the Soviet Union.
        This new development forces the issues beyond Castro's own  control
        and provides, at least, four courses of action to take.

             One is to do  nothing,  and  let  this  opportunity  pass  by.
        Either  the Soviets are tempted to use Cuba as a beach head, again,
        or Castro finds another underwriter -for he cannot make it  on  his
        own.   The  second  is  the  "hard line":  implementing a stauncher
        embargo or even a military operation.  The  embargo  will  not  put
        Castro  on  his  knees.  And his followers won't topple him if they
        perceive  a  hostile  US  under  which  their  own  fates  will  be
        uncertain.

             The third option is to lift the embargo if Castro  performs  a
        few  of  his  well  known  PR  stunts  and  "opens  up" the system.
        However, we can establish an analogy between the situations in Cuba
        and  South Africa.  There, the White government has currently go,ne
        further than Castro would ever be willing to  go,  because  of  the
        economic  sanctions.   An  untimely  lifting  of  the embargo would
        provide more harm than incentive for co ntinuing evolution.

             There is a fourth alternative,  less  flamboyant  but  perhaps
        more  effective.   To  propiciate  that  a  large  group of nations
        supports the call for Castro  to  hold  internationally  supervised
        elections  in  a  multiparty  setting.   If  Castro  refuses,  such
        negociated approach would  signal  his  followers,  especially  the
        middle-rank military and party members, that Castro IS the problem.
        But that there is life after  Castro,  for  them.   That,  if  they
        unequivocally  accept  political  and  economic pluralism, they may
        survive Castro's fall.  After Castro, these functionaries  have  no
        place  to go and may be better off with such a solution than with a
        Ceaucescu-like blood-bath.  After all,  Castro  is  64  and  nobody
        lasts forever.

Cuba After Castro.                                             Page 97
J. L. Romeu


             The current window of opportunity will vanish when the Soviets
        fall  to  the  temptation of using near-by Cuba, again, for hostile
        activities against the US.  Or as soon as Castro can  find  another
        underwriter willing to pay his way.

             Will there be adroit players, in both  sides  of  the  Florida
        Strait, to engage in the solution of this problem?

A Democratic Surprise                                          Page 98
J. L. Romeu


                                         .





                               A Relevant Question:
                               ====================


                     Is a Cuban Democratic Surprise Possible?
                     ========================================



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu
                                   P.O. Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217



                         Submitted to: The Post Standard.

                             Date: November 20, 1991.



                             Published: December 1991.

A Democratic Surprise                                          Page 99
J. L. Romeu


             This november, I went for sixth time through the experience of
        participating  in an American election.  And it still impresses me.
        For, compared with the system in my native Cuba, it  is  night  and
        day.

             In Cuba, there is a single party,  controlled  from  above  by
        Castro  and  the Central Committee he has appointed.  The party, as
        it is simply known, approves all  local  level  candidates.   These
        elect,  following  a piramidal scheme, the upper level regional and
        national representatives.  Finally,  the  national  representatives
        re-elect President Castro for yet another term.

             Cuban  citizens  live  under   strong   government   pressure.
        Collective   fear  stems  both,  from  the  government's  ceaseless
        propaganda and complete control of the economy.  For,  if  you  are
        signaled  out  as "not revolutionary", the possibilities of social,
        educational or economic opportunities are gone.  Therefore,  Castro
        always obtains over 99 percent of the vote.

             With such past experiences, it is not difficult to imagine  my
        delight  when,  in  1986, I was finally able to select, and from no
        less than six national and regional  parties!   Nor  to  understand
        why,  with  every  new  American  election, I think again about the
        possibilities of a return to pluralism in Cuba.   And  of  ways  in
        which a peaceful transition to democracy could be fostered.

             Last year's events in  Eastern  Europe  have  only  galvanized
        these  thoughts.   Peaceful transitions have occured in Hungary and
        Poland, while street riots triggered the  changes  in  Germany  and
        Checoslovakia.   Only in Rumania, the stuborness of an old autocrat
        forced the changes to come through a blood bath.

             But in Cuba, one year after the collapse of socialism, we  see
        no sign of change.

             One golden opportunity arose this  last  October,  during  the
        fourth  congress of the Cuban Communist Party.  Many, in Cuba an in
        exile, hoped Castro would use the congress to promote change or  at
        least to send a signal that change was welcome.  Some even expected
        a resolution creating  some  type  of  political  space  for  legal
        opposition.

             Instead, Castro scorned pluralism and hailed orthodox marxism.
        But the country's economic situation is so bad that some change had
        to be made.   Direct  election  for  national  representatives  was
        approved -even when the party still desingates the candidates.  And
        pro Castro catholics and other believers are now allowed to  belong
        to  the  communist party.  Measures of little practical value other
        than as public recognition  of  the  religious  discrimination  and
        political  control  that Castro has held over his 32 year old reign
        in Cuba.

A Democratic Surprise                                         Page 100
J. L. Romeu


             However, Cuban economy is in such bad shape after  the  Soviet
        Union  stopped their subsidies, that another radical resolution was
        passed.  Cuba will start promoting  joint  economic  ventures  with
        foreign capitalists.

             Castro is hoping to redress his  economic  mess  by  building,
        with the money of European and Latin American entrepreneurs, a huge
        tourist industry.  Totally  new  turistic  enclaves  will  rise  to
        exploit the famous warm and beautiful Cuban beaches.  But the Cuban
        people know they will not be able to stay in these hotels, nor  buy
        in their well stocked tourist stores.  And this is starting to blow
        the minds of people that have to stand  daily  in  line,  for  many
        hours, to buy the most elementary things.

             The level of popular discontent may be assessed by the  number
        of  political  and human rights groups that have recently appeared.
        And also by the fact that they are  not  radically  suppressed,  as
        they  were  ten  years ago -but instead tolerated as sort of escape
        valves to popular malaise.

             However,  these  mushrooming  dissident  groups  can  also  be
        perceived  as  Heralds  of  a new era in the Cuban political scene.
        For, the well over a dozen that already exist  and  function,  have
        organized  into  two  broad  alliances.   And they have established
        working relations with the two main broad political coalitions that
        constitute the Cuban exile.

             One of the two internal alliances,  Concertacion  Democratica,
        linked  with a group of liberal, christian and social democrats and
        nationalist exiles, the Democratic Platform.  The second, Coalicion
        Democratica,  is  associated  with  the conservative Cuban American
        National Foundation.  Both organizations are requesting from  Latin
        American  and  European  governments  to  support  a  transition to
        democracy in Cuba.  And their  success  can  be  measured  by  last
        week's  meeting,  in  New York, of Argentina's president Menen with
        leaders of the Cuban exile.

             In addition  to  their  political  lobbying,  both  coalitions
        broadcast daily to Cuba.  Their two stations, La Voz del CID and La
        Voz de la Fundacion read the daily editorials of Miami's two  large
        Spanish  papers, The Herald and Diario Las Americas.  Many of these
        editorials are written in Cuba by dissident group leaders, and sent
        abroad.   And  most  discuss pluralism and the ways of achieving it
        via a peaceful transition, a very dangerous proposition.

             In spite of Castro, a De Facto national dialogue  has  started
        between   the  two  Cubas.   Two  of  the  three  components  of  a
        pluralistic system, the right and the center, are in the process of
        organization.   And  the  third component, the democratic left, may
        well arise any time from amidst Castro's younger and more enlighted
        ranks.  The increasing number of defectors is a good sign of that.

A Democratic Surprise                                         Page 101
J. L. Romeu


             The embryo of Cuban pluralism  has  been  created.   Continued
        internal  dissidence  and  international  pressure can only help it
        nourish and develop.  And, in due time, either Castro  moves  aside
        as  Pinochet  did,  or  he  will  be  ushered aside by the wheel of
        history, as with Stroessner.  No more, no less.

Post-Castrism                                                 Page 102
J. L. Romeu


                                         .





                              Post-Castrism Is Here:
                              ======================



                                  And Now, What?
                                  ==============



                                 Jorge Luis Romeu
                                   P.O. Box 6134
                                Syracuse, NY 13217



                         Submitted to: The Post Standard.

                             Date: September 8, 1991.



                          Published: September 12, 1991.

Post-Castrism                                                 Page 103
J. L. Romeu


             Post-Castrism, as a historical period,  has  already  started.
        Many  facts  blattantly  announce  it:  the recent demise of Cuba's
        remaining friends  in  the  Soviet  Government,  after  the  failed
        right-wing  coup;  the  rise  to  power  of  Boris  Yeltsin, one of
        Castro's worst Soviet critics;  the  recent  disclosure,  by  Cuban
        Security  forces,  of  a  "plot"  to  organize  a coalition between
        domestic  dissident   groups   and   exile   organizations,   which
        constitutes an official recognition of the internal opposition; the
        recent  trip  of  a  delegation  of  the  Cuban  American  National
        Foundation to meet Boris Yeltsin, to discuss Soviet aid to Cuba and
        the recent withdrawall of all Soviet troops from Cuban territory

             Castro's chances for international support are  slim.   Soviet
        aid,  already  dwindling,  will be further reduced or cutt off.  He
        has no credit and no hard currency.  And things at home are so  bad
        that  the  government  has  been  building  tens  of  thousands  of
        bicycles, for lack of transportation, and  a  pigeon  mail  carrier
        service  has been recently started.  Cuban artists and technicians,
        and even government officials,  have  been  increasingly  defecting
        during  their  trips  abroad.  And hundreds have already defied, in
        the six months of 1991 alone,  the  rough  waters  of  the  Florida
        Straits to leave the island in search of greener pastures.

             After his 32 years in power, Castro appears totally  worn  out
        and  isolated.   as  he  recently verified during his sejour at the
        conference of  Latin  American  Heads  of  State,  in  Guadalajara,
        Mexico.    Therefore,   unless  Castro  can  quickly  find  another
        $sponsor$, hostile to the U.S.  and willing to  underwrite  him  in
        exchange for a $base$ close to American shores, he is doomed.  And,
        reciprocally, there is a legitimate American interest  to  see  him
        go.

             There are now at least three options for the U.S.   government
        to  encourage,  in  Cuba,  a move such as those occurred in Eastern
        Europe and the  Soviet  Union,  to  re-instaure  pluralism  in  the
        island.   They  are:  to lift the embargo, to strengthen it further
        or  to  stay  the  course  and  react  in  accordance   to   future
        developments.    There  are  also  at  least  four  factors  to  be
        considered in the Cuban problem which influence  its  course:   the
        Cuban government, the internal opposition, the Cuban exiles and the
        interested foreign nations (specifically the U.S., Soviet Union and
        Latin American countries).

             The first option, lifting the embargo, would only  extend  the
        suffering  of the Cuban people and give Castro a chance to continue
        his senseless hold to power in Cuba.  But intensifying the  embargo
        would  in  turn, generate more negative effects than the advantages
        they may offer.

             One important negative effect is to send the wrong message  to
        the  Cuban  establishment.  Like the Soviet one or any other, it is
        composed of many elements who want to survive Castro's downfall -or
        who  may  even  dissaprove  of  his policies but cannot or dare not
        overtly oppose them it.  Remember how many of  today's  new  Soviet

Post-Castrism                                                 Page 104
J. L. Romeu


        leaders were former Party members, including Yeltsin himself.

             Another negative effect is the neutralization of the  internal
        opposition,   which   could   easily   be   accused  by  Castro  of
        $collaborating$ with the  $foreign$  agressor.   The  Cuban  exiles
        would also split.  Certain exile organizations have close ties with
        the current American  administration  and  their  larger  influence
        would  exacerbate  the  rivalries  among  them.  Finally, the Latin
        American countries would not favor a solution that depended on  the
        direct  American intervention, which could revive some ill-feelings
        of the long-forgotten Big-Stick era.

             A third strategy is to stay the  course  and  send  the  Cuban
        government  a  clear  message  that  an  evolution to pluralism and
        market economy would  be  considered  very  favorably.   Government
        officials  in  Havana  would  then realize that there is life after
        Castro for those who participate in the solution -as there has been
        life  after  communism  in  Poland  and  in  Hungary  for those who
        accepted pluralism and helped the country to move toward it.

             The opposition inside Cuba could then openly  work  towards  a
        pluralistic  evolution with the aid of the Cuban exile groups.  And
        the Latin American countries could now support such a move  towards
        pluralism  in  Cuba, as they have supported similar moves in Chile,
        Argentina and  Brasil.   Cuban  officials  would,  then,  seriously
        consider having to shoot their own under Castro's and the old guard
        orders, or in joining the effort to restore a  regime  where  there
        would be political space for all.

             Under the political evolution  scenario,  a  brief  transition
        followed  by an internationally supervised election would lead to a
        pluralistic system.  The embargo could then be used as  a  positive
        incentive  to move towards pluralism, and in the same way as in the
        South African case, encourage change.

             The worst drawback of an evolutionary approach is the lack  of
        trust,  among  the  opposing Cuban factions.  The proponents of the
        evolutionary process may be initially perceived as  agents  of  the
        other  side  and  mistrusted.   And the possibility of treason will
        haunt everyone during the initial phases of the negociations.   But
        Chileans,  Polish, Portuguese and more recently Soviets themselves,
        who dared to pursue this approach, are now living under  democratic
        regimes.

             Those who argue that an evolution toward pluralism  is  utopia
        may  be  disregarding  the  Cuban  history.  By their inhability to
        negociate  their  differences,   Cubans   suffered   two   American
        interventions,  a  terrible  revolution in 1933 and thirty years of
        communist dictatorship after 1960.  Many Cubans, in the island  and
        abroad,  have  learned  the  virtues  of  tolerance and the ills of
        authoritarianism.  They have also learned that the only alternative
        to an evolutionary solution is for the ailing Castro to continue in
        power.  Until one day a bloody revolt occurs, as it did in  Rumania
        with  the  ailing Ceaucescu, and no one may then be able to control

Post-Castrism                                                 Page 105
J. L. Romeu


        the events.  One dictatorship may well follow another and not  even
        the  U.S.   will  come  out ahead, having to live with an unstable,
        unreliable neighbor 90 miles away!

             Post Castrism is alive and well, and waiting to be approached.
        Will  the  interested  players  have,  by now, finally attained the
        political maturity to resolve it?

Epilogue                                                      Page 106
J. L. Romeu


                                     Epilogue
                                     ========





             This book is the result of many long hours taken  from  family
        and personal time, after the normal daily obligations.

             There are no regrets, for a powerful reason has  always  moved
        us to work for this and other similar endeavors.  One that links us
        with a group of silent men and women, beyond distance and time.   A
        group that has no voice, for whom no bells toll.

             We already committed to paper, in the Foreword of our doctoral
        dissertation, such ideas, and we will repeat them here:

                       Finally,  there  has  always  been  a
                  driving force behind my desire to complete
                  this doctorate; one which goes beyond  the
                  recognition  of  the  PhD.  degree and the
                  great satisfaction of working in Academe.

                       A long time ago, while  a  mechanical
                  engineering     undergraduate    at    the
                  University of Havana, I was expelled along
                  with  hundreds of other young Cubans.  Our
                  only crime  was  not  complying  with  the
                  official  marxist  philosophy.  Our dreams
                  were shattered; our world crumbled.   Most
                  of  us  never  had  a chance to return nor
                  graduate.

                       Let this,  my  personal  success,  be
                  also theirs.
                                     -O-