WHO IS BUSH TO CALL FOR FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS
BY JULIANNE MALVEAUX

Hot on the heels of the security controversy that questions how much President Bush knew about September 11, and just a week after the Republican Party revealed that they were using a September 11 fundraiser for partisan purposes, the President is revealing his hypocrisy about democracy again. Trolling for Cuban votes for his brother, Jeb, and for himself, he turned up the heat on his anti-Castro rhetoric at a Florida fundraiser this week. He said the trade and travel embargoes against Cuba will remain unless Cuba “reforms.” Bush described Cuban president Castro as a tyrant with a “bankrupt vision” and challenged him to hold “free and fair” National Assembly elections next year. If Castro toes the Bush line, the President says he will work with Congress in softening the US stance toward Cuba.

Some were grateful that President Bush did not tighten the Cuban embargo. Others saw this for the hypocrisy that it is. Who is George W. Bush, after all, to call for free and fair elections? Is he still operating under the illusion that he was freely and fairly elected? If he believed so strongly in free and fair elections, why did he suppress the vote in Florida? And why has he not more enthusiastically embraced the cause of election reform in the United States?

Last time I checked “free and fair” elections were not a condition for trade in the United States. Does Vietnam, after all, hold “free and fair” elections? Does China? Russia? We’re going to spend $10 billion in the next ten years on nuclear nonproliferation programs with Russia, which is a good thing. But I don’t recall us putting the status of Russian democracy in the mix.

Don’t get me wrong – free and fair elections in Cuba would be a good idea. They’d be a good idea in the United States, too. Beyond calling for free and fair elections, Bush called for economic reforms in Cuba, too. He’d like to see “respect for private property”, independent labor unions, and more freedoms for small businesses. I had to laugh when I read that Mr. Bush wants independent labor unions in Cuba. I’d be curious to know what the AFL-CIO thinks of Mr. Bush’s respect for unions at home. His attempt to place union-busters on the National Labor Relations Board suggest that he played a stronger labor card on Cuba than he would ever be willing to use at home.

After former President Jimmy Carter visited Cuba, it would have made sense for Mr. Bush to follow up the visit by softening trade restrictions with Cuba. Many members of his party (but not Jesse Helms) favor such softening, with Congressman Jeff Flake (R-Arizona) taking an aggressive position about softening the embargo. Two years ago, Illinois governor George Ryan, speaking for Illinois grain farmers, said he, too, favored a lifting of the embargo. A trade embargo flows both ways, and it is possible that the United States could benefit from trade with Cuba. But we’ve allowed our own “bankrupt ideology,” to use Bush’s own terms regarding Castro, to dictate our Cuba policy.

Some, like the editorialists at the Wall Street Journal, describe Bush’s actions as an “olive branch” toward Castro and Cuba. I see it differently. I wonder how Mr. Bush dares attempt to dictate the politics of another country, when he cannot control the politics in his own. I wonder how he dares talk about free and fair elections when he is the beneficiary of electoral unfairness. I wonder how he talks about economic reforms, when there are economic reforms we could well make here. I cringe that he says Castro has “turned a beautiful island into a prison” when, in fact, Castro has improved the living conditions for Cubans of African descent in the past four decades.

Trade could do much to further improve life in Cuba. If President Bush wants there to be democratic influences, he could end the tourism embargo and make it easier for people in the United States to visit Cuba and see conditions for themselves. Instead, he panders to those expatriate Cubans whose rigid hatred of Castro goes back decades. While he may pick up some Florida votes for his brother, he does little to place our foreign policy toward Cuba on firm and fair footing.

Congress will probably have to take the first step in driving foreign policy with Cuba. Good news – many in Congress find it absurd to continue a trade embargo against Cuba even as we have normal trade relations with Vietnam.