japanese maple

In ancient Latin the word ‘castra, castrorum’ means fortified camp. While reading last’s week New Statesman(1), I couldn’t help thinking that no other name would be more suitable to Cuban Líder máximo Fidel.

I was aware of the fact that Castro has always been a thorn in the United States’ side since he rose to power. The desire to get rid of the pugnacious Cuban leader has stayed on the US agenda for almost 50 years. Even so, I was very impressed by reading how steadily Fidel Castro has remained anchored to the island off Florida and how vain American attempts to do away with him have been.

From Kennedy to Bush, US governments have tried a thousand ways and means to bring Castro down. Anyway, “combined policies of drastic economic embargoes, political isolationism and ongoing CIA attempts to foment insurgency,” haven’t really worked.

Now the Bush administration wants to make people believe that once the Fidel era is over, Cuba will turn into something else. Something the US can easily subjugate. But, as Andrew Stephen highlights, Bush has probably counted his chickens before they have been hatched.

This means that the US president hasn’t taken into account Cubans’ interests. However statistics say that Cuba is quite well off.

Bush firmly believes that, once Castro is dead, there won’t be any “succession” of his brother Raul, who is, according to the US administration, a “dictator-in-waiting.”

Yet, US expectations might be disappointed. Cubans might choose to stay with the Castros after all. In this case, if the US refuses to cooperate with Raul, Cuba is likely to remain an impregnable fortress. A real ‘castra’ as Romans would say.

References
(1) New Statesman, “No Fidel, No Problem?” by Andrew Stephen – February 12th 2007 (p.32-34).