After Castro: Is Capitalism on Horizon?

The ultimate irony of Fidel Castro’s economically failed socialist revolution is that it has provided fertile soil for a restoration of capitalism when the Cuban leader is gone.

The 72-year-old Castro commemorated his 40th anniversary in power yesterday. But the promise of his wildly popular guerrilla triumph over Gen. Fulgencio Batista has gradually faded and given rise to a frequently heard question: “After Fidel, what?” Much will depend, of course, on how the Cuban transition develops and how the United States behaves at the moment of change.

There is, naturally, the danger that a resurgent capitalism may turn out to be corrupt and destructive for the more than 11 million Cubans. For now, however, the immediate concern is how and when Fidelismo might end, peacefully or violently. The issue is no longer whether the Castro regime will be transformed, reformed or liberalized. As a practical proposition, this has ceased to be relevant in Cuba, just as Fidelismo itself has ceased to matter to most of the world. Attention is now centered on what may replace it. But it is pointless to guess what might force Castro’s disappearance: natural death, assassination or a coup from within?

The reality, meanwhile, is that Cuba is already evolving away from Fidelismo. The evolution began, almost imperceptibly, some years ago, but the significant turning point was Pope John Paul II’s trip to the island last January. The visit had been conceived by the pope as a long-term proposition aimed at creating an environment conducive to a slow, but inevitable, succession.

There are those in Cuba--and Washington--who dismiss the pontifical initiative as a failure because Castro is still in power. They underestimate, however, the pope’s sense of history, just as others did in the cases of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union 10 years ago. Every transition requires a catalyst, and the pope was one when he visited Cuba.

With the exception of Francisco Franco in Spain and possibly Augusto Pinochet in Chile, no dictator in recent history has prepared his country for transition from tyranny to democracy through gradual political and economic liberalization. Castro formally designated his brother, Raul, now defense minister and the Communist Party’s No. 2 man, as his successor--quite different from preparing succession in the usual sense. But it is simply impossible for Castro to transfer the personal support he still enjoys as a legendary revolutionary chief and a figure of enormous charisma to the deeply disliked and stunningly uncharismatic Raul. If Raul, himself 67, attempts to don his brother’s mantle, Cuba risks immense perils, even the threat of a civil war, when rival factions, including Cuban exiles from Florida, face off in a power struggle.

Castro may well be aware of this state of affairs. His talent for survival stems, in large measure, from his uncanny ability to adapt to changing circumstances and exploit them. From his first imprisonment for attempting a coup in 1953 to the Cuban nuclear crisis in 1962, from the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 to the current Cuban economic disaster, Castro has succeeded because he was one jump ahead of the game. Accordingly, he may now be contemplating a non-Raul solution to save what is left of his revolution and his place in history. This may explain Castro’s remarkably deferential attitude toward the pope in Havana, his small but steady concessions to the Roman Catholic Church and his new dark-suit international diplomacy.

Only two institutions in Cuba are efficiently organized and enjoy widespread respect: the highly professional armed forces, which were never part of the repression apparatus and have clean hands, and the church, whose prestige and influence grow daily. In all likelihood, the transition from Castro will be guided by these two institutions, in conjunction with a small group of Castro’s key advisors, whose hands are also clean and who may be vital in assuring the continuation of the national administration, domestically and internationally. Together, they would constitute, in effect, a provisional government designed to guarantee public order, assure new freedoms and rebuild the shattered economy.

The economy and Cuban living standards are indeed in an appalling state. National economic performance has dropped 38% in the last five years, and there are no prospects for improvement. Sugar production, Cuba’s principal source of wealth, may fall this year to 2.5 million tons, from an annual 7 million in the 1980s; spring floods and autumn droughts nearly ruined the sugar industry, and the sharp drop in world sugar prices has further reduced Cuba’s export earnings. The country hosted 1.7 million foreign tourists last year, but this alone cannot offset the ruin in other economic sectors.

The armed forces are deeply involved in the economic crisis. Not only do they witness the hardships of their unemployed, underemployed and undernourished families, but Castro handed them responsibility for running most of agriculture and much of light industry and services, such as tourism. Gen. Ulises Rosales del Toro, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and Cuba’s most powerful man after the Castro brothers, now heads the sugar ministry.

Castro is striving to defuse mounting social tensions, which now include frequent protest demonstrations in the streets, often in front of courts where opposition militants are tried, most recently on Dec. 10. Castro’s concessions mainly have been to the church and religion, but are inevitably given a political spin.

Cardinal Pio Laghi, in charge of Catholic education worldwide, flew from the Vatican to Havana last June to urge more teaching in church schools, a taboo until recently. In September, 10,000 Cubans marched in the streets of Havana in a procession led by the image of Our Lady of Charity, the patron saint of Cuba, an event that last occurred 30 years ago. In November, the regime allowed 19 foreign Catholic priests and 21 religious workers to assist Cuban churches and institutions. There are now 305 Catholic priests on the island, a number unmatched in 40 years. On Dec. 1, the regime announced that, henceforth, Christmas Day would be celebrated as a national holiday.

One may well wonder whether these religious concessions signify a loss of government contro. When they are coupled to the skyrocketing black market in everything, toleration of a dollar economy and the return of prostitution to the streets of Havana, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that a new situation is developing in Cuba, one that may soon lead to an open political crisis.

The military leadership, in addition to its worries about the economy, has not forgotten the 1989 trial and execution of Gen. Arnaldo Ochoa Sanchez, a hero of Cuba’s wars in Africa. Some well-informed Cubans think that, “at the right moment,” military chiefs, in alliance with new political forces, may invite Castro to step down and accept an “honorary chairmanship” of the nation as a step toward a form of democracy. It is impossible to predict what would happen if such a situation developed. A chairmanship may be an acceptable “exit strategy,” but no U.S. policies should be planned on such an assumption.

If a military-Christian alliance were to form a transition government, its key figure might be Ricardo Alarcon, the chairman of the now rubber-stamp National Assembly, former foreign minister and former ambassador to the United Nations. He is one of Castro’s closest advisors and is generally liked. Alarcon’s military partner, as a coequal, might be Gen. Rosales del Toro, popular among Cuban civilians and soldiers. It also happens that the general is well acquainted with a number of U.S. generals and admirals from the protracted negotiations for the liquidation of Cuba’s armed forces in the war in Angola and, later, through visits by important retired U.S. commanders he invited to Havana.

The third key player in a transition regime might be Vice President Carlos Lage Avila, the economic czar. He knows major U.S. business and banking figures as a result of their visits to Havana and his attendance at the World Economic Forum annual conference in Davos, Switzerland.

With such a team in power, Cuba’s economy could significantly improve. Given the country’s natural wealth--sugar, nickel, some petroleum, famous cigars and its potential for high food-stuff production--the island would immediately attract major foreign investors. With a solidly educated and skilled work force, Cuba could reconstruct its economy better and faster than most of Eastern Europe.

Forty years after the victory of Castro’s socialist revolution, the Cuba he will leave as his heritage could well be a capitalist dream. Castro has brought Cuba literacy, much technical expertise, impressive public-health structures--and an absolute conviction that socialism is not the wave of the future or the present. Instead, clean, modern capitalism and a free market, plus democracy, is what his nation needs today. Adios, comandante?