[On line protest] [Events] [Material Aid] [Membership form] [Brigades] [Facts File on Cuba] [Cuba Si! index] [Other Cuba links] [CSC Contact] [Web contact] [Sponsors] [contents overview]
By Karen Lee
Havana
Driving into the Plaza de la Revolucion under cool, sunny skies
two days after the Pope's departure, no vestiges remained of the huge
white canopy erected for the Pontiff's open air mass, nor of the 8
story high portrait of Jesus which adorned the National library for
his visit. But the familiar wrought-iron icon of Che which
graces the Ministry of the Interior building facing the statue of
Jose Marti still smiles down over the plaza.
In 1981, when Nicaraguan Jesuit priest Fernando Cardenal, who
headed the Sandinista literacy program, was asked by a reporter from
the "Catholic Worker" how he accounted for the difference in
relations between the Revolution and the Church in Nicaragua and
Cuba, Cardenal replied: "Well, the Cuban Revolution happened 22 years
ago, and what's changed in the meantime isn't the Revolution, it's
the Church."
A few years later, Cuba's Monsignor Carlos Manuel de Cespedes, Vicar
of Habana, was more explicit: "If Vatican Council II [in which the
Catholic Church enunciated its now-famous "option for the poor"] had
happened earlier, or the Cuban Revolution had happened later, the
whole history of relations between the Church and the Revolution
would have been different".
On the eve of Pope John Paul II's historic visit to Cuba in
January 1998, Ricardo Alarcon, elected leader of Cuba's national
parliament, noted: "The Catholic Church has changed a lot in these 30
years; it's more ecumenical, more concerned with the poor, with
social justice, with a better life for everybody on earth....We feel
their message is pretty close to our own beliefs."
And while basking in the glow of national elections in which over 94%
of the electorate cast valid ballots in favor of the revolutionary
slate proposed by grassroots commissions, President Fidel Castro
urged the Cuban population to receive the Pope "as a man who is
concerned about many major problems in the world today."
While the Pope's visit to Cuba was officially billed as a
"pastoral visit" to Cuban Catholics at the invitation of her bishops,
the world's attention has been drawn nevertheless to the eminently
political nature of the Holy See's expeditions abroad.
Responding to repeated questions as to whether the Pope could be
expected to "bring down the Cuban Revolution" the way he had helped
topple socialist governments in Eastern Europe, Fidel told reporters
gathered around him on election day that those who see the Pontiff as
some sort of "exterminating angel of socialism, communism and
revolution" were likely to be disappointed. "They underestimate his
intelligence, his character and his way of thinking," the Cuban
president added.
On the contrary, now that the Cold War is over, and the Holy See has
turned its attention to some of the suffering of humanity caused not
by socialism but by capitalism, "the Pope is possibly one of the
biggest headaches facing the United States today", Cuba's
Comandante-en-Jefe added.
And so enter the Pope --along with nearly 3000 members of the
international press, ranging from superstars to technicians. How did
the foreign media deal with all this? As with the Eco-Summit
of 1992, a forest of trees must have been felled and a sea of oil
must have been drained to provide the paper and energy for the
massive media blitz surrounding the recent Papal visit to Cuba. But
that doesn't necessarily mean that people came away from reading
their newspapers and magazines, watching tv or listening to radio
coverage, with a clear and comprehensive picture of what went on. As
Danny Schechter said in his recent book about American TV news: "The
more you watch, the less you know".
As usual, most reporters got out of the Papal visit what they brought
to it: if they saw the Pope as the "Angel of Death" who helped bring
down Communism in Eastern Europe, and were rooting for him to do the
same in Cuba, they saw and heard a Pope who criticized the Cuban
government for maintaining a one-party system ("no democracy"),
imprisoning those who peacefully speak out and organize against it
("no human rights", ie, no civil liberties, which is what "human
rights" have been limited to in current jargon), not allowing enough
space for the Church (the Catholic Church wants to run its own
private schools again, and have access to the national media). Just
being able to state all of these things publicly in Cuba was
considered a victory by many -- ignoring the fact that Cuba has been
bombarded with these critiques by press, radio and television
emanating from Miami and other parts of the US for nearly four
decades now.
On the other hand, many were forced to admit that Cuban
revolutionaries also benefitted from the Pope's message: "the world
should open up to Cuba" (end US-imposed attempts to isolate Cuba
politically); "blockades are wrong because they strike out
indiscriminately and hurt the weakest" (end Helms-Burton and all
other forms of the US blockade of Cuba); the alternative to
Eastern-European style socialism is not neo-liberalism, globalization
and the "savage capitalism" ruling the world today, and it would be a
mistake for young people to get taken in by the lure of consumerism,
which will not fulfill their most basic spiritual needs.
Even certain Papal positions that at first glance might seem
antithetical to Cuban ideology were mitigated by the way the Pontiff
expressed them, and by current reality. So his main theme -- unity of
the family (anti-divorce, anti-abortion) -- did not have the same
sting it would in heavily Catholic countries where Church doctrine is
too-often converted into law. In Revolutionary Cuba, no law is going
to be enacted to deny a woman control over her own body; both divorce
and abortion will be permissable no matter what the Church says. But
in a country that highly values the importance of the family unit and
has been trying to teach young couples that abortion is NOT a form of
contraception but rather the FAILURE of adequate contraception,
getting a little Papal backing for what the Centers for Sexual
Education have been preaching for decades is not necessarily a bad
thing. Most Cubans nodded their heads appreciatively at his words of
encouragement for the family to stay together.
At the open air Mass in Santa Clara, capital of one of Cuba's central
provinces, a young couple explained that they hoped to raise their
young daughter a Catholic, because they felt the moral position of
the Church would set a good example. But when queried about the
Church's position on contraception and abortion, they demurred. "I
wouldn't go that far" the young woman said quietly. "That seems a
kind of extreme position."
In Havana, a middle-aged family of Catholic activists, recommended to
us by their parish priest for the key roles they play in the church's
Catechism classes and Commission on the Family, expressed support for
the Church's position against abortion, but ignorance of it's stand
against other forms of contraception. "I think the Church only
forbids forms of contraception that induce abortion, like IUDs",
professed Rene, whose hair and beard are now streaked with grey. He
and his red-headed wife Marianela, who runs a beauty parlor out of
their home, are convinced that condoms don't fall into that category.
Like many northamericans, Cuban Catholics also seem to ignore or wink
at the Church's prohibition of divorce.
In the beginning the Pope was careful to word his messages so they
could be interpreted broadly, emphasizing the themes of "peace, love,
hope, and reconciliation" which both Vatican dispatches and Cuban
Catholics reiterated in the months prior to his arrival. So when he
spoke of "human rights" it was usually in the same sentence as
"social justice" -- a kind of human rights that every Cuban
revolutionary could proudly boast of.
It was only after the Santiago Archbishop took a much harder,
anti-government line in his introductory remarks at the mass in that
southeastern city -- known as the cradle of the Revolution -- that
the contradictions became more apparent. Archbishop Pedro Meurice
lashed out at "false messiahs", and complained of Cubans who "confuse
the nation with a single Party".
Yet when we asked one Santiago resident if the Archbishop's remarks
surprised him, he responded, "No. He's been saying those kinds of
things for a long time. Maybe not with as much media coverage, but
here in Santiago we already knew his position."
Asked what changes he thought the Pope's visit would bring about --
one of the most typical queries put by foreign media to Cubans --
Hebert Perez, a professor of history at Santiago's Oriente
University, told us "I don't think there will be many changes after
his visit. I think his visit was the culmination of changes that have
been occurring for a number of years, since 1985 or 1986."
He mentioned the discussions concerning religion following the
publication of the book "Fidel and Religion" in which the Cuban
president told Brazillian liberation theologist Frei Betto that he
did not believe Marx was referring to "all times and all places" in
his description of religion as "the opiate of the masses", nor did he
feel that Christianity and revolution were necessarily antithetical;
the removal of any restrictions to Communist Party membership based
on religious affiliation, and the strengthening of the Cuban
Constitution's proscriptions against discrimination on religious
grounds by changing the description of Cuba from an "atheist" state
to a secular one.
Prof. Perez' words seemed to confirm what Rene and Marianela and
other Catholic activists in Havana had told us. For months now they
had been going door-to-door, evangelizing. Not only had they
encountered no impediments from the government, they said, but most
people were quite willing to open their doors and listen to them.
"Over 90% of the homes we visited were receptive to our message" Rene
insisted.
Still, it was clear that many people in Santiago were not all that
happy with the Pope's message. While everyone applauded his outspoken
criticism of the US blockade, neoliberalism, and consumerism, and
many hoped that his calls for an opening up toward Cuba would mean an
easing of the serious economic crisis Cuba has been enduring since
the fall of the socialist camp, many citizens of this rebel city were
affronted by the Archbishop's remarks and wary of some of the Pope's.
Only Fidel's strongly worded admonitions, prior to the Pope's
arrival, that all Cubans were to treat him courteously and with
respect, kept them from voicing disagreements through jeers, shouts
or slogans.
But the plaza where Santiago's mass was held was not as full as his
first two, in Santa Clara and Camaguey, had been, and many people
were seen drifting off before it concluded. Some were clearly angry,
others bored. Some may have been simply getting out of the hot sun,
which kept the local Red Cross volunteers busy carrying off those who
passed out from the heat.
On the Pope's last day, in Havana, under cold, leaden skies, people
urged on by revolutionary committees started gathering along the
route the famed "Popemobile" would take and at the Plaza of the
Revolution early in the morning. Weather forecasters on Havana's
radio stations assured listeners that no rain was predicted for that
day, an unspoken encouragement to heed Fidel's call for
revolutionaries, even if they were non-believers, to fill the
Plaza.
In other cities where masses were held, members of the small,
isolated opposition groups -- who were eagerly sought after by the
hordes of foreign media flooding the country -- would sidle up to
foreign press crews, state their willingness to be interviewed, or
surreptitiously pass notes to them and then scurry off. In Havana,
where the greatest number of these congregate (often animated by
support provided from US and other western diplomats), opponents were
much more outspoken both before and during the mass. Small clusters
within the crowd (estimated at over 200,000) occasionally chanted
"The Free Pope wants us to be Free". Only one attempt at unfurling a
counterrevolutionary banner was noted, its bearer quickly escorted
out of the crowd. The multitudes of revolutionary supporters bit
their tongues, as they'd been asked, even when John Paul II made his
strongest (implied) critiques to date (implied, because at no time
did he specifically say "Cuba" or "the Cuban government" when he made
his appeals for release of political prisoners, greater openings for
the Church, etc.)
In his remarks prior to the Pontiff's arrival, Fidel had urged Cubans
"Let's show how a socialist and communist revolution can respect all
believers and all non-believers" by going to the masses and being
courteous. He emphasized that Party cadre should attend the masses
"but none of them should voice a single slogan; no one should carry a
single sign...no one should cause even the most minimal provocation"
or show any displeasure "regarding any phrase, word or pronouncement
that we don't like, that seems unjust or disagreeable."
From the Cuban standpoint, the negative remarks made by some of the
Catholic hierarchy and even the Pope himself -- many of which most
certainly must have seemed unjust to them -- were counterbalanced by
the importance of showing the world that the Cuban revolution is
stable and sure enough of itself that it can afford to let such
remarks go by, unchallenged.
"We will be worthy of an Olympic gold medal as a result of the
success of the Pope's visit", Fidel asserted, adding that a
revolution that can achieve this "is an invincible revolution; a
nation that can do this is an invincible nation."
And it must certainly have required Olympic forbearance for Cubans
not to respond to much that was said directly, between the lines, or
reinterpreted through the prism of US and other hostile media.
In his first homily, the Pontiff took a swipe at the State-run
schools, with remarks about family control of their children's
education that could be interpreted as both a pitch for the
reinstitution of Catholic schools and a criticism of the program
which sends Cuban teenagers to schools in the countryside where they
learn the importance of manual as well as intellectual work. "Not
easily accepted and often traumatic is the separation of children and
the substitution of the role of parents as a result of schooling away
from home even during adolescence" he admonished, adding that such
situations "sadly result in the spread of promiscuous behavior, loss
of ethical values, premarital sexual relations at an early age and
easy recourse to abortion".
Since shortages in recent years have made this program much less
popular than in an earlier period, his remarks may have reached many
receptive ears. But older Cubans who remembered the Church's role in
"Operation Peter Pan" (a program through which the US State
Department and Catholic priests smuggled 14,000 children out of Cuba
in the first years of the Revolution -- half of whom did not see
their families again for many years, if ever) felt it was
hypocritical for the Church to be attacking this program in the name
of "family unity" when the Church's own actions had produced far more
traumatic, longterm separations in the name of anti-communism.
In another discordant note, the Pope used an encounter with the sick
and suffering at a suburban Havana leprosy clinic, at which people
with AIDS and other disabilities were also gathered to receive the
Pontiff's blessing, to make his most explicit plea on behalf of
"prisoners of conscience", whom he described as among the
"sufferers". It must have taken super-human restraint for some of
those present to maintain a courteous silence, knowing that the
exceptional medical care they receive is due to the revolution these
"prisoners of conscience" have been trying to overturn.
The contradiction between the Pontiffs words of consolation and the
CHurch's doctrine must have been especially to the men and women with
AIDS and HIV, who refrained from pointing out that the Church's
policies against the use of condoms place millions at risk around the
world, and that its condemnation of homosexual acts as sins helps
promote the strident homophobia that leads to both psychological
damage and physical acts of aggression. If some of them felt "used"
by the Pontiff as an occasion to slip in one of his political
messages, none were discourteous enough to say so.
All in all, spokesmen for the Cuban government expressed tolerance of
the Pontiff's sniping and satisfaction at the many points he
expressed strongly with which they agreed. "We always look for the
points we have in common with others," explained one government
analyst.
But others were less comfortable with the way that the Pope twisted
certain issues. Some examples: the Catholic Church seeks the right to
reopen Catholic Schools, without explaining that they have been able
to offer RELIGIOUS instruction all along; what they are not allowed
to do is to run private elementary and secondary schools. When the
new revolutionary government nationalized ALL private
schools--Catholic, Protestant and secular-- in the early 60s this was
not aimed at the Catholic Church; it was simply a matter of
eliminating one of the artifices of class society.
Similarly, when the Catholic Church complains about lack of access to
the media, it ignores the fact that the Churches throughout the
island produce more than a half dozen newspapers. What they are
seeking is a greater voice in the public media -- a media sharply
reduced even for the most pro-revolutionary voices by the economic
crisis and the blockade.
Similarly, revolutionary Cubans would argue that the people
imprisoned for their opposition to revolutionary institutions are not
simply prisoners of conscience, but people who have violated laws in
their active attempts to bring and end to the status quo. In the name
of "human rights", many argued, these opponents of the revolution
would undo a system that has brought the most fundamental human
rights -- the same ones the Pope is appealing for all over the world
-- to the entire Cuban people.
But despite all of these real differences, Fidel Castro's last words
to the Pontiff as he prepared to leave the Jose Marti Airport
expressed thanks on behalf of all the Cuban people, "for all your
words, even those with which there may be some disagreement."
True, the Pontiff took aim at many aspects of Cuban society,
including its social, educational, political and economic systems. He
made a strong plea for pluralism and specifically rejected the
one-party ideology of the Cuban state, insisting that "true
liberation cannot be reduced to its social and political aspects,"
but must also include "the exercise of freedom of conscience -- the
basis and foundation of all other human rights."
Nevertheless, the Pope was always careful to "balance" his message,
hitting at what he saw as the evils of communism, but never letting
the capitalist world off the hook. At his last morning Mass, the pope
dwelled on some themes that Cuban revolutionaries have been pointing
out for some time, and in a similar style and language. "Various
places," he said, "are witnessing the resurgence of a certain
capitalist neoliberalism, which subordinates the human person to
blind market forces and conditions the development of people on those
forces."
Without mentioning the International Monetary Fund or World Bank by
name, the pope criticized the austerity programs those organizations
have imposed on Latin American countries and other Third World
countries. "At times," he said, "unsustainable economic programs are
imposed on nations as a condition for further assistance."
He made his most critical reference to the American economic blockade
of Cuba at the departure ceremony at Jose Marti Airport, saying that
what he described as Cuba's "material and moral poverty" arises not
only from "limitations to fundamental freedoms" and "discouragement
of the individual," but also from "restrictive economic measures --
unjust and ethically unacceptable -- imposed from outside the
country."
With Fidel Castro standing at his side, he said, "In our day, no
nation can live in isolation. The Cuban people, therefore, cannot be
denied the contacts with other peoples necessary for economic, social
and cultural development, especially when the imposed isolation
strikes the population indiscriminately, making it ever more
difficult for the weakest to enjoy the bare essentials of decent
living -- things such as food, health and education."
In the end, Cuban revolutionaries are satisfied that the view of Cuba
provided to the world through the Pontiff's visit, and his own calls
for an end to the isolation and blockade of the besieged island, were
worth tolerating some of his dissident points of view.
As if to confirm that opinion, the Guatemalan government announced
renewal of diplomatic relations with Cuba --broken off in 1961 -- the
day after the Pope's visit.
How the United States and the rest of the world respond remains to be
seen. THe US had a heavy team of lobbyists in Havana, led by the US
State Department's top Cuba Specialist, Michael Rannenberger, on the
scene to give their spin to diplomats, clergy, visitors and as many
of the 3000 foreign journalists who wanted to listen. Slickly
prepared 40-page "briefing books" distributed by the US Interests
Section (The USA's only diplomatic representation in Cuba),
supplemented by a 23 page "PRESS UPDATE--January 1998" supplement was
distributed covering everything from handy phone numbers in Havana to
sections on "US Policy Toward Cuba", "Human Rights and Civil Society
in Cuba" to advice for "US Travelers to Cuba during Papal Visit". The
most blatant aspect of the disinformation packet was a section called
"Zenith and Eclipse: A Comparative Look at Socio-Economic Conditions
in Pre-Castro and Present Day Cuba" using charts, graphs and
questionable figures purporting to show that Cubans actually lived
better, and had better health care and education BEFORE the 1959
Revolution than they do today.
It's not clear whether they impressed any visitors; they certainly
didn't change the Pope's opinion. Much of the US and some other media
reflected the basic State Dept line regarding Cuba's political system
and its individual liberties definition of human rights. (Key members
of all the major US and Canadian media, however, were pulled out and
sent back to Washington in the middle of the Pope's visit to report
on the more titillating story of Clinton's newest sex scandal.)
A quote from President Clinton heading the Press Update calls for "a
reciprocal relationship....where as Cuba shows more support for human
rights and democracy, we should open up," implying, as usual, that
Cuba does not live up to US and world standards on these issues. It
is hard to imagine a more resounding demonstration of Cubans' belief
in their democratic electoral system than the 94% backing Fidel got
for the revolutionary slate in the January 11 national assembly
elections, but few expect the US to recognize "democratic elections"
in Cuba until a candidate they favor wins.
In any case, Cuba is long used to the US moving the goal posts
whenver the current reality shows that Cuba is already complying with
the current United States conditions for improving relations. They
have lived nearly four decades with US hostility, attacks and
blockade, and are prepared to do so as long as necessary, Party
leaders and adherents insist.
Prof. Wayne Smith, former US diplomat in Cuba and International
Studies specialist on Cuba, stated repeatedly that he felt the only
"loser" in this encounter between Fidel and the Pope, Cuba and the
Vatican, was the United States. "The Church came out strengthened,
and Cuba was able to show the world that it is able to be flexible
without losing ground" he observed, confirming Cubans' opinion that
the revolution is "not at risk".
A government analyst pointed out that the visit, and the response of
Cuban revolutionaries, is one more demonstration that the US policy
is both wrong and isolated. "If the repeated votes against the US
blockade at the UN are not enough, the Vatican has just added the
final vote," he commented.
Much of the world media insisted that Fidel Castro hoped the Pope's
visit would "legitimize" the revolutionary government. When queried
about this, National Assembly President Ricardo Alarcon replied: "I
don't think it's a matter of legitimizing the Revolution; I think
what it does do is DE-LEGITIMIZE the US position, and further
isolates it."
Score at the end of the Papal visit? Catholic Church 1, Cuban
Revolution 1, United States Policy 0.
[On line protest] [Events] [Material Aid] [Membership form] [Brigades] [Facts File on Cuba] [Cuba Si! index] [Other Cuba links] [CSC Contact] [Web contact] [Sponsors] [contents overview]