Cuban-American community divided over policy
By Henry Hamman in Miami
The US response to last month's crackdown on dissent in Cuba that resulted
in the imprisonment
of 70 opposition activists has highli ghted deep divisions inside the powerful
Cuban-American
community.
So far, President George W. Bush has limited the US response to two actions.
The US this month
expelled 14 Cuban diplomats on the grounds that they were intelligence
agents. Meanwhile, it
has launched experiments with satellites and airborne transmitters to beam
into Cuba
programming from US government-backed Radio and TV Marti, and begun a 24-hour
transmission
of a high-power short-wave broadcast of Radio Marti.
The Cuban American National Foundation, and Cuban organisations further
to the left, have
endorsed Mr Bush's approach. But Ninoska Pérez Castellón,
a leading figure in the far-right
Cuban Liberty Council, says the administration's response has caused "disappointment
from
people who had been very supportive of Bush".
"The revision of Cuba policy has taken longer than it should," she said.
Ms Pérez dismissed the experiments with more powerful broadcasts
by Radio and TV Marti as
"a one shot deal", and argued that the diplomatic expulsions "had nothing
to do with repression in
Cuba".
In an apparent signal of their unhappiness with the administration response,
three Republican
Cuban-Americans in Congress - Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, Lincoln Diaz-Balart
and Mario Diaz-Balart -
last Tuesday declined to attend a White House ceremony honouring a number
of Cuban
dissidents and former political prisoners.
Organisations such as the Cuban Liberty Council urged Mr Bush to cut the
dollar remittances that
Cuban-Americans send to relatives in Cuba, which total up to $1bn annually.
That revenue has
become a mainstay of Cuba's economy. There were also calls for cutting
air links between the
US and Cuba.
But many Cuban-Americans, and the Cuban American National Foundation, argued
against either
a remittance ban or a cut in flights.
Further, US officials doubt whether a ban on remittances would have been
effective, and argue
that a cut in direct flights would have simply diverted air traffic between
the US and Cuba to
more circuitous routes. In addition, there are worries that an overly aggressive
response could
provoke Mr Castro to unleash a new wave of migration to the US, as he did
in 1980 and 1994.
A Bush administration official says the measures are part of an "ongoing"
response to Fidel
Castro's latest crackdown on political dissent.
"People keep expecting there's going to be this major announcement of the
results of a policy
review. That's not the case. A policy review is not like an autopsy," he
said.
As part of its incremental approach, the US is expected to increase support
for Cuban dissidents
and civil society advocates.
Domestic political calculations also seem to be at play. Conventional wisdom
holds that Mr Bush
must carry Florida to win a second term, since New York and California
were seen as firmly
Democratic. In the past that has always meant supporting the economic embargo
against Cuba,
and harsh anti-Castro rhetoric.
But as more moderate Cuban-American views emerge, Mr Bush has more freedom
to move
towards the centre. Complicating the Florida electoral equation is the
entry of Florida's senior
senator, Bob Graham, into the Democratic presidential race.
Mr Graham is popular with Cuban-Americans, and his presence on the ticket,
either as the
party's candidate or vice-presidential nominee, could make winning Florida
more difficult for Mr
Bush.
Some analysts argue that Mr Bush's improving opinion poll ratings mean
his chances of carrying
two other populous states - New York and California - are growing, and
as a result the White
House is somewhat less concerned about Florida.