Month: March 2014
Ukraine isn’t over
With the G7 countries issuing a strongly worded statement yesterday against Russia’s annexation of Ukraine, optimists will want to go back to worrying about Malaysia Airlines flight 370. That would be a mistake. Despite President Putin’s disavowals, there is still serious risk to Ukraine from a Russian push into its southern provinces, perhaps as far as the Russian-occupied Transnistria area of Moldova:
Why? Let me count the gains to Moscow:
- Crimea would no longer be cut off from Russia proper.
- The southern provinces of Ukraine are home to heavy industries that cater in part to Russia’s military.
- Having annexed Crimea, pro-Russian political forces are unlikely in the future to win any national elections in Ukraine, so “protection” of Russian speakers requires their incorporation into Russia.
- Ukraine would be reduced to a landlocked remnant with little prospect of being more than a burden to the European Union and the United States.
- Rump Ukraine will find it necessary to make its peace with natural gas supplying Russia.
If thinking along these lines predominates in Moscow, it is hard to imagine anything the EU and US could or would do to prevent a Russian military move. The Ukrainian army is in no position to resist. Washington and Brussels imagine that Ukrainians would mount an insurgency against Russian occupation. That could be a sanguinary affair that could last a decade or more.
It is not easy to come up with reasonable policy options. Deployment of observers from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which is already in progress, is a good idea. But if Putin decides to move, they will stand by to document how many tanks and armed personnel carriers have entered and where they are located.
Military options are out. Though the credibility of the Alliance is at stake, NATO has no obligation and few means with which to defend Ukraine, even though it is a member of Partnership for Peace. The Alliance will have its hands full protecting its Baltic and other easternmost neighbors. It may be able to provide some intelligence and logistical support to Ukraine, but that’s about it.
Thoughts fly to the money Kiev owes Moscow. Does it really have to pay its debts if Russia invades? Probably not, but it would then have to worry about where to find natural gas for heating next winter. There is no quick alternative available, so far as I know.
The ruble and the Russian stock market are already down, but that is likely to be a temporary response with no substantial long-term impact. Only if the EU and US come up with sanctions that really bite Russian banks hard is Moscow likely to pay attention. That’s unlikely, as the Europeans export too much to Russia and depend too much on Russian gas to get serious about financial sanctions anytime soon.
It looks as if we are in for a long-term response to the annexation of Crimea and whatever other parts of Ukraine Putin goes after. We’ve been in this situation before. We had no really good policy response to the Soviet occupation of the Baltics at the end of World War II, of Hungary in 1956 or of Czechoslovakia in 1968. Nor have we done anything substantial about South Ossetia and Abkhazia, which declared independence from Georgia in 2008.
What we had going for us during the Cold War was strategic patience. In the 1950s, I was taught in junior high school that the Baltics were “captive nations.” It seemed quixotic at the time to imagine that they would ever be free. But they were liberated at the end of the Cold War and have since become NATO and EU members.
We have wanted to believe that the ideological contest that gave us strategic patience is gone. Unfortunately, a new one appears to be taking its place. Autocrats like Putin are not relying any longer on state-controlled economies. They are not even pretending to read Marx or Engels. They are enjoying the fruits of at least partly free economies, under the control of their favored oligarchs. We may need even more patience than in the four decades or so of the Cold War in order to see the backs of Putin and his like.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Cuba is an island, but…
Though in many respects isolated, Cuba is like most countries–especially small ones–in depending for its fate on the rest of the world. It was once a Soviet satellite that agreed to host nuclear weapons targeted against the US and tried to export its revolution throughout Latin America (including Puerto Rico) and to Africa, where they say 2400 Cubans died in what they consider liberation wars. Judging from my visit to Havana last week, Cuba is now more interested in its relationship with Venezuela and the United States, the two most important sources of its vital hard currency.
The relationship with Venezuela echoes Cuba’s revolutionary past. The Castros shared with Hugo Chaves, whose face still graces more than one wall in Havana, a belief in social revolution and a “Bolivarian” alternative to capitalism. Caracas still helps to keep Cuba financially afloat with subsidized oil supplies, payments for Cuban doctors, and other less transparent transfers. Cubans understand this reliance on cash-strapped Venezuela is likely coming to an end. That generates at least part of their sense of urgency about economic reform.
The relationship with the United States is far more fraught. Opposite my favorite Cuban jazz bar in Obispo stands a Western Union office, where Cubans line up to get transfers from relatives in the US and elsewhere. Like this young woman in American flag tights:
The sign in the window shows Fidel and Raul under the heading
The Revolution, thriving and victorious, goes forward.
Pardon the poor photography:
It doesn’t get a lot more ironic than that: powered by US dollars sent from Miami.
It wasn’t supposed to be this way. The original idea of the American embargo, which the Cubans call a blockade, was to starve the regime of the resources it needed to survive, causing collapse of the Castro regime. Various presidents have tightened and loosened the embargo, depending not only on what is going on in Cuba but also on American politics. Even in its current relatively loose form, the embargo certainly hurts the Cuban economy. Because of US legislation restricting access to ports and banks by non-American (as well as American) companies that do business in Cuba, many cruise and cargo ships don’t call at Cuban ports and many companies don’t officially transact business with Cuba.
Cubans are resourceful though and one way or another manage to get access to most of the US equipment they need, including Apple computers and sophisticated sound boards for their recording studios. It is expensive and difficult, but possible. Along the way, a good deal of illicit money presumably changes hands.
The question is what purpose this serves. Most Americans, and most Cuban Americans (even in Florida), believe the policy should change. It is an older generation of members of Congress who keep the embargo in place. It is unclear to me at this point what Cuba would have to do to get it removed, though I suppose the issue of property claims is close to the top of the list.
A US Foreign Claims Settlement Commission has certified 5911 claims worth $6.4 to $20.1 billion, depending on whether you compound the interest or not. Even if he has lived rent-free, I can only imagine how a Cuban who has lived 55 years under the Castro regime will feel when a foreign claimant arrives to take possession of her house. Or how the successor regime will feel about digging into its empty pockets to compensate the claimants, plus 6% interest accumulated over 41 years (I don’t know why 41).
What the embargo has not done is cause the collapse of the regime. Quite to the contrary, the Castros seem to revel in isolation and hostility, which helps them to claim a legitimate role as defenders of Cuba’s independence. One loyalist told me that in the end the Revolution is mostly about “dignity,” which he associated with Cuba’s ability to make its own way in the world, and “respect,” which he associated with pride in its uniqueness. This should sound familiar to those who have been following the Arab uprisings. Vague as they are, these sentiments are not to be trifled with.
But dignity and respect won’t go far without a stronger economy, which is where I started this series of posts on Cuba. What the Cubans want from the United States above all is more tourism, which will depend I imagine on building far better hotels. The shabbiness and poor management of the once fashionable Plaza, where we stayed at a cost of about $150 per night, is almost unbelievable, even for someone who travels as much as I do in poor countries and conflict zones.
Increased tourism will also depend on simplifying the process for going there. This is a Washington issue, not a Havana problem. At least for those on group tours, the Cubans issue tourist cards easily and require you to fill out a simple health form. Procedures at passport control both entering and leaving were not onerous (certainly not as onerous as some instances non-American friends recount about entering the US). There are charter flights, including some operated by American Airlines, non-stop from Miami (and Tampa) to Havana. Based on the experience of my fellow travelers, those are far more reliable and no more expensive than flying from Cancun (avoid Cubana!).
It’s the US government that requires you to read complicated licensing rules and threatens you with exorbitant fines if you violate their less than clear provisions. More than one Cuban asked who we think we are punishing. They have a point, especially as the tourist industry is the leading edge of capitalism in Cuba.
The Cubans would also like the US to use the monster container port they have built at Mariel, once the jumping-off point for so many Cubans to leave the island because it is so close to Florida. The odds of that seem low at this point, but importing goods into the US from Cuba would somehow be a fitting end to an embargo whose logic and purpose seem lost.
The United States is no more an island than Cuba when it comes to interacting with its neighborhood. Cuba will be a major issue for us as it transitions, if only because of geography, family ties and property claims. We need to be thinking now about how to help enable post-Castro Cuba to achieve a dignified and respectful outcome for the island’s more than 11 million inhabitants.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Cuba libre?
While the Cuban economy has developed into an odd socialist/capitalist hybrid that is stretching its limits, its complex political system has seen no comparable evolution.
It is not, at least on paper, a classic one-party system in the Chinese or Soviet mold. According to its loyalists, the Communist Party does not choose candidates or exercise executive authority. Its role is supposedly to “oversee” the government, with concern about corruption or other abuse of power avowedly its top priority. Certainly it keeps an eye on things and brooks no organized political opposition at the national level. Public political discourse is about continuing, perfecting, improving, enhancing and polishing the Revolution, not reversing or even modifying it.
The system does provide for complaint and criticism, especially at the local level. Cubans elect neighborhood representatives, supposedly without reference to membership in the Communist party, who in turn elect municipal representatives, who in turn elect provincial representatives, who in turn elect the national parliament and the council of state, which elects the president. All the elections are purportedly non-party contests. This elaborate system of cascading indirect elections obviously allows for a good deal of centralized control. But it also allows a measure of initiative. Loyalists believe it provides ample opportunity for citizens to express themselves and argue their cases. Dissidents would laugh at that proposition.
No one expects any major political change before the Castro brothers are gone from the scene. Neither Fidel nor Raul is seen much in public these days. Nor does the visible cult of personality focus mainly on them. Pictures of the eternally youthful Che Guevara and the equally immortal Camilo Cienfuegos, admired for his humility, are more common. Jose Marti, the nineteenth century leader who fought the Spanish, is omnipresent. Still, the Castros cast a long but no longer loquacious shadow from behind the walls and hedges of their estates in Miramar.
Once they are gone, no one has much idea what might happen. In our stay in Cuba last week, we observed no sign of organized political opposition, but I confess we didn’t seek it out either. I didn’t want to put anyone in danger, including myself, by ill-considered contact. Many Cubans, including the security services, will have seen “Bringing Down a Dictator,” a documentary about the fall of Milosevic in which I appear repeatedly as a commentator. The closest we came to hearing the voice of dissent was a woman who said both her well-educated children had left for Europe and did not want to return despite the recession there. “We have hope,” she said, “but that’s all we’ve had for 55 years.”
She did not say what she had hope for. That seemed a common phenomenon. A Cuban painting observed in a private collection expressed the feeling well: it showed a massive demonstration surrounded by high walls. The demonstrators held signs with nothing written on them.
Cubans know how the rest of the world lives, despite the loyalist media. We listened to Miami FM radio in a car outside Havana, and a loyalist told us 80% of the music young Cubans listen to is American. They are not shy about expressing dissatisfaction in private. Like Mario Comte, the detective anti-hero of Leonardo Padura’s masterful Havana series, they see the seamier side of things and want to hold miscreants responsible, but they see no viable proposition for systemic political change. Asked about a multi-party system and more direct election of political representatives, many Cubans shrug indifferently. They like the opening of economic opportunity they have seen in recent years, but don’t know what might open up their political system.
One wise loyalist told us Cubans would certainly want to keep the goals of social justice and security. He thought only slow change likely. No one wants to propose an end to free education and health care. I’ll regret the passing of the day when a tourist can walk day and night in poor neighborhoods of Havana without fear of anything more than restaurant hawkers flashing menus. But the decline of the Cuban peso relative to the convertible peso (CUC) is doing something Marx talked about, but in reverse. The state is withering away, not to some communist utopia but rather under pressure from the capitalist sector of the economy.
It may not be long before Cuba, like Vietnam or China, is socialist in name only, authoritarian but weirdly disconnected from a society defined mainly by the unrestricted capitalism of its energetically entrepreneurial citizens. The internet–available to Cubans and tourists only at high prices and rare outlets today–is supposed to arrive within weeks on Cuban cell phones. The crowds lined up outside the telecommunications company are at least partly due to people signing up.
Still, Vietnam and China, both of which are connected to the internet, maintain one-party control over political power. That’s what the Castros will never give up. But they have the advantage of their revolutionary mantle, broad social consent and decades of instilling fear, which is declining markedly. Both brothers are in their 80s. Who knows what their successors will be able, willing, or compelled to do?
On my way back into the US, a Customs officer in Miami asked about the purpose of my visit to Cuba. I replied that I was studying the prospects for peaceful democratic transition. He smiled broadly and said that was great. “I’m Cuban,” he said with the lilt so common in Miami, and waved me in without a peek at the paperwork American visitors to Cuba have to fill out to satisfy US government regulations.
More on that in a next post on Cuba’s international situation.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Cuba’s economic hybrid stretches the limits
I have been wanting for years to see Cuba before the end of its Castro-style communism, so wife Jackie and I went last week to internet-deprived Havana. We were almost too late. However closed and oppressive Cuba was in the first 40 years after its 1959 revolution, the period since has wrought big, though still controlled, changes. A slow transition is already under way.
I’m someone who reads the Ten Commandments as a description of what my ancestors were up to at the time of their composition. So I read the billboards on the way in from the airport as reflecting the Communist party’s anxieties:
The changes in Cuba are always towards more socialism
The Revolution is strong and going forward
We never forget our history and traditions
The Revolution is a beautiful and indestructible reality
The author of these billboards is clearly worried that someone might misunderstand what is going on as a rejection of the revolution, Cuba’s history and traditions and its socialist system.
Well they might. Cuba’s socialism is like Havana’s decrepit and decaying buildings. There is so little left, it’s a wonder how they remain standing. The society still has its points of socialist pride: free, universal education resulting in very low illiteracy and (sort of) free health care resulting in a life expectancy of more than 79 years (above Mexico’s and even, by a hair, Puerto Rico’s). And its points of shame: I met no one who likes the rationing of 10 or so staples, for sale at subsidized prices when they happen to be available, or the exorbitant taxation of (necessarily imported) motor vehicles. Budget constraints and efficiency will require changes to both the health and education systems sooner rather than later. And something needs to be done about the 2800 money-losing state-owned companies.
But these socialist virtues and defects are atavisms. The past few years have seen the development of a second, market economy. This is most apparent in the tourism sector, which is an important source of foreign exchange and employment, but we stumbled into it also in the agricultural sector, publishing, taxis, music and art. It is even creeping into the health system, where doctors expect gifts from patients in addition to their government salaries. In education, tutors are becoming commonplace in preparation for exams. Sometimes it is associated with cooperatives (in agriculture and publishing, for example) and at other times with individual entrepreneurs (taxis, music and art). At the government-owned Abdala recording studio in Havana, I was assured the very capable technicians producing the recordings do not have to depend on their government salaries to survive. The musicians wouldn’t allow that. Though I doubt it is literally true, we were repeatedly assured that every Cuban has, in addition to official, government employment, a second, private-sector hustle. Certainly on the streets of Havana there is ample evidence that the private sector is generating a significant portion of the locally produced income.
This second, market economy is associated with a second currency. The convertible peso (CUC), originally created for use by foreigners, has replaced the peso in as many as 80% of the island’s financial transactions. The vastly overvalued CUC (it is sold in official exchange houses at more than $1) has virtually driven the Cuban peso, adorned with the famous portrait of Che Guevara, out of circulation. This Cuban variation on Gresham’s law has left government salaries, paid in pesos, at between 15 and 35 CUCs per month. You might not starve on that if you can find rationed supplies, but an even half-decent lifestyle requires more like 300 CUCS per month. A cab driver gets 25 CUCs for a single drive in from José Martí airport, a guide 5 CUCs per day in tips for each client, so 125 CUCs per day for a quire of tourists.
There is no lack of awareness in Cuba of this grotesque incongruence. Raoul Castro has referred to it explicitly in one of his few public appearances and promised to unify the currencies this year. The whole country is holding its breath to see how this will be done, as there will necessarily be winners and losers. Cubans keep some money in banks, but a lot is kept in their homes (stuffed in their mattresses, figuratively or literally). Increasingly, people are investing in property. Seventy per cent of the country’s real estate is said to be in private hands already. But there are limits: you are supposed to own no more than one home and one car. There is a lot to be gained or lost from a hybrid economic model that has clearly stretched to its limits and will change, in one direction or another, in the next year or so.
Next up: politics
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Egypt: new voices, untold stories
Tuesday morning the Atlantic Council hosted an event discussing the major issues facing Egypt today. The featured speakers were Sarah El-Sirgany (Nonresident fellow, Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East and freelance journalist), Mohammad Tolba (Founder, Salafyo Costa), Basil Dabh (Journalist, Daliy News Egypt), and Mosa’ab El Shamy (Photojournalist). Mirette Mabrouk, Deputy Director for Regional Programs at the Atlantic Council Rafik Hariri Center for the Middle East, moderated.
Sarah El-Sirgany said the current population in Egypt is about 90 million people. It is a diverse demographic. Looking at public polls, if presidential elections were held tomorrow, 51% of the population says it would vote for Al-Sisi and 45% is undecided. The fact that such a large percentage is undecided challenges the idea that public opinion is unified. Outside Cairo, politics is a lot less relevant. Egyptians living in rural areas are undecided. Generally they do not care as much about politics. When the Egyptian uprising began, the protestors’ slogan was, “The people want to bring down the regime.” Today, the people’s wants have been appropriated by government parties claiming to represent the Egyptian people.
Mohammad Tolba spoke about how those in power have disappointed and failed the Egyptian people in the past three years. Rural communities lack basic services and cannot meet their daily needs. In his opinion, going to the streets and protesting is no longer the way to bring about meaningful change. It is time to translate slogans and chants into concrete actions. The “real” Egypt needs to be empowered, not just the elite.
Mohammad founded Salafyo Costa in response to discrimination and negative stereotypes of Salafis. Currently there are 30,000 members. Salafyo Costa uses unorthodox methods to encourage interfaith dialogue. For example, through soccer matches between Salafis and Christians, Salafyo Costa promotes coexistence and mutual respect. The organization also sends teams of doctors with different religious backgrounds to provide humanitarian aid to marginalized communities.
Mibrette Mabrouk asked, what are the troubles photojournalists face today?
Mosa’ab El Shamy replied that the biggest challenge has been the rise in violence and imprisonment of journalists since June 2013. Since then, at least five photojournalists have been killed and two have been detained. Photojournalists are particularly at risk because they have to be at the forefront of events. They must always be braced for arrests. The challenges journalists face are not always limited to violence from the state. Violence is multifaceted and does not come from one side. Journalists spared by the police are likely to be targeted by protesters. Due to the level of violence and tension on the street, civilians are becoming more suspicious of photojournalists. In addition, Mosa’ab gets the sense that Egypt is no longer a hot topic. The international community has lost interest in the Egyptian uprising.
Nevertheless, Mosa’ab wants to document and increase awareness of events in Egypt. As an independent photojournalist, he feels like he can direct news through his photos.
Basil said that since 2011, there have been unprecedented crackdowns on journalists. Since Morsi’s overthrow, pro-Morsi media outlets have been shut down and have not returned. The past three years have been a constant battle of narratives. The mainstream media has generally fallen in line with the current government narrative. It is bolstered by conspiracy theories. Independent journalists do not fact-check. They accept what the government tells them. This is either because there is no way to verify the information or because it is too dangerous to do so.
Sarah pointed out that there is a growing movement of social media and citizen journalism. However, there are many issues concerning objectivity and fact checking. Many people are driven by personal beliefs and objectives rather than the truth.
Share this, I'll really appreciate it:
Peace Picks March 17 -21
There were a few cancellations and postponements today due to the weather. Nevertheless, here are our picks for DC events this week:
1. Peace and Stability in the Central African Republic
Tuesday, March 18 | 9:30 – 11am
Brookings Institution, Falk Auditorium; 1775 Massachusetts Avenue NW
REGISTER TO ATTEND
Register for the live webcast
The Central African Republic has become one of the most challenging humanitarian, security and political crises on the African continent since the coup that unseated President Francois Bozizé one year ago. Violence along community and religious lines has claimed thousands of lives, and more than one million people remain displaced. Strong domestic and international efforts are needed to address the humanitarian and security crisis as well as restore state authority and consolidate peace in the country.
On March 18th, the Africa Growth Initiative (AGI) at the Brookings Institution will host a conversation with Archbishop Dieudonné Nzapalainga, Imam Omar Kabine Layama and Reverend Nicolas Guérékoyamé Gbangou, the Central African Republic’s highest-ranking Catholic, Muslim and Protestant leaders, respectively. Their work to prevent violence and promote interreligious tolerance has won national and international praise. AGI Senior Fellow Amadou Sy will moderate the discussion, which will include questions from the audience.
RSS - Posts
