A War of Words Is War Enough : Cuba: Shooting down civilian planes deserves punishment, but keep Castro in perspective; he is a pest, not a threat.

This is not cojones. This is cowardice. -- Ambassador Madeleine Albright at the United Nations

Despite its use of a vulgarity in Spanish, Ambassador Madeleine Albright’s denunciation of Cuba’s downing of two civilian American aircraft was an aptly powerful description of a shamelessly brutal act.

Sadly, however, Albright’s words at the U.N. may also be remembered as applying much more broadly than she intended.

The era is long gone when standing toe to toe with Cuba--or, to be more specific, with Fidel Castro--was a symbol of U.S. resolve. Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union and Cuba’s loss of a Kremlin subsidy worth anywhere from $4 billion to $7 billion a year, Cuba’s standing as a player on the world stage has faded.

In other words, it is really no display of courage (to use a more tasteful word than the normal English translation for cojones) to strike out at Castro. Of course, that won’t stop those eager for any opportunity to vilify the aging Cuban dictator--the Jackal of the Caribbean, as some Miami radio stations refer to him, using no other name or title.

One can only hope that President Clinton doesn’t get carried away in the excitement of the moment and lose his cool in dealing with Castro, as virtually every president since Dwight D. Eisenhower has, at one time or another.

So far, Clinton has been reassuringly restrained. He strongly (albeit less colorfully than Albright) denounced the Cuban regime for its illegal action in sending jet fighter planes to shoot down two unarmed Cessnas, killing the four people aboard. He stopped the charter flights from Miami that represent the only direct link between the United States and Castro’s island. He also will sign a bill to impose additional U.S. economic sanctions on Cuba and those who do business with the Castro regime. But even that’s a pretty pointless gesture since, after almost four decades of U.S. embargo, there is precious little left for this country to keep out of Cuba. And it is silly to let Castro be the cause of trade fights with major trading partners like Canada.

There is, of course, always the option of overt military action against Cuba, like an air or naval blockade, or even a U.S. invasion. But, however satisfying it might be, military action against Castro simply wouldn’t be worth what it might cost in human lives.

That may sound callous, but consider: Since he overthrew dictator Fulgencio Batista in 1959, Castro has consistently been a headache for Washington, confiscating American-owned property and sending thousands of refugees to this country. A pest, to be sure. But a genuine threat? Only once.

That was in October, 1962, when Castro allowed the Soviet Union to station nuclear missiles in Cuba. Then he eagerly--indeed, obsessively, according to recent histories--urged his Soviet allies to launch them toward the American mainland in a preemptive strike. Thankfully, Premier Nikita Khrushchev didn’t listen to Castro, and instead caved in to President John F. Kennedy’s demands that all Soviet nuclear weapons be withdrawn from Cuba.

Since that was the closest the world had ever come to nuclear war, it is understandable that the Cuban missile crisis has cast a lingering pall over all subsequent U.S.-Cuban dealings. It has also given Cuba and Castro a significance in U.S. foreign policy and domestic politics that is out of all proportion to reality. Castro is, after all, a pretty impotent threat without the Soviets to back him up. And even he won’t live forever. What we should really be focusing on now is how we relate to Cuba in the post-Castro era.

By focusing on the future rather than the past, one can ponder Cuba in more realistic terms: an island of only 11 million people with a steadily eroding socialist economy worth less than $14 billion. That’s not even as big as Ecuador’s economy, much less Latin American giants like Mexico or Brazil.

Truth be told, this latest confrontation between Washington and Havana is less a foreign-policy issue than a matter of domestic politics--for both governments.

As he has several other times in recent Cuban history, like the Mariel boatlift in 1980, Castro is trying to pick a fight with the United States to distract Cubans from problems at home. Specifically, he is worried about the domestic reaction to a recent crackdown on Cuban political dissidents, and the likelihood that Cuba’s economy will shrink again this year as the sugar harvest comes in below projections.

And while Clinton is no doubt sincerely outraged at the murder of civilian pilots, he also is talking tough about Cuba with an eye toward reelection. The Florida primary is March 12, and the president doesn’t want to sound less anti-Castro than potential Republican rivals like Bob Dole and Pat Buchanan.

As this latest Cuban crisis plays itself out, we would do well to remember that when it comes to foreign affairs, Cuba is now just small coj . . . er, potatoes.