I TOLD a foreign friend that Canada's prime minister was going to visit Fidel Castro, the Western Hemisphere's last dictator. "Why?" she asked, genuinely perplexed. "Do you need sugar?"
There are really only two good reasons to shake hands with a dictator. One: to advance or protect your national interests. Two: to change the dictator's behaviour. Jean Chrétien did neither when he visited Mr. Castro in Havana. His trip was an embarrassment for Canada and a gift for the Castro regime.
Canada has no strong national interest in Cuba, a Caribbean island that poses no threat to us and offers only limited opportunity. Unlike, say, China, another dictatorship that Mr. Chrétien has chosen to visit, Cuba offers no vast market for Canadian goods. Thanks to Mr. Castro, Cuba's economy is a ragged, half-dead thing. Even if it recovers, the trade we do there will never amount to a fraction of what we do with Cleveland, Ohio. If Mr. Chrétien ever feels guilty about doing the grip and grin with China's Jiang Zemin (and he has shown no sign that he does), he can shut his eyes and think of one billion Chinese consumers. What does he think of when he clasps Mr. Castro's hand? The scowl on Jesse Helms's face?
There has always been a bit of cheeky anti-Americanism in Canada's relationship with Cuba. Pierre Trudeau went there in 1976 partly to show that he wasn't in Washington's pocket. Mr. Chrétien did the same. He wanted to show the whole world that, despite nasty old Mr. Helms and his silly Helms-Burton bill, Canada will keep on trading and talking with Cuba just as long as we want. If Washington treats Mr. Castro as a leper, we will treat him as a pal. That'll show those Yanks.
But let's assume for a minute that there's more to Mr. Chrétien's trip than juvenile nose-thumbing. Let's assume that the Prime Minister genuinely thinks he can change Mr. Castro. Is he being realistic?
Mr. Castro has been in power for nearly four decades. He has stayed in power by maintaining a one-party state dominated by one man: himself. Communism's collapse in other parts of the world seems only to have redoubled his determination to stay in control.
To quote from a recent report by Human Rights Watch: "Cuba's human-rights problems include the routine crushing of internal dissent by the imposition of prison sentences for so-called crimes such as 'enemy propaganda,' 'contempt for authority,' 'illicit association,' 'dangerousness' and 'illegal exit.' At least 800 political prisoners languish in extremely poor conditions. . . . Punitive measures such as prolonged incommunicado detention and beatings are frequent. . . . Cuban security forces continue to harass and arbitrarily detain scores of non-violent activists each year."
Will gentle Canadian persuasion change such a system? Will Mr. Castro clap his hand to his forehead and declare that the democratic, Canadian way is right after all? IT seems highly unlikely. Mr. Castro gave Mr. Chrétien almost nothing for the trouble of coming to Havana. His only concession, if you can call it that, was to consider the release of four prominent dissidents.
What he gained in exchange was invaluable. The two things that Fidel Castro craves most are credibility and legitimacy. A visit to Havana by the Prime Minister of Canada, a country respected around the world, is a gift more precious than frankincense. Mr. Chrétien is the first leader of any major country to come visiting in years. With a victory over the United States at the United Nations human-rights commission under his belt, Mr. Castro can now argue that Cuba's isolation is ending. The Yanquis may persist in their criminal embargo, but look, the Canadians are coming!
Mr. Chrétien was barely off the plane before Mr. Castro began ranting about the "genocide" that the Americans were committing in Cuba. Mr. Chrétien, reduced to performing as a stage prop for his host's histrionics, helped out with a weak little sermon about "dialogue over estrangement, engagement over isolation." How terribly Canadian. Could the Prime Minister not foresee how he would be used?
A more hard-headed prime minister would have realized the value of the visit to Mr. Castro and demanded something real in return. Instead of meekly handing over a list of dissidents whom Canada wants released, he would have demanded that dissidents be released during the visit. Instead of mumbling a few words about democracy in a speech about the wonders of trade and engagement, he would have demanded the right to speak openly and publicly about the value of freedom. Without those concessions, he should have stayed home.
No one apart from the Americans seriously argues that you should pretend Cuba does not exist. The U.S. embargo gives Mr. Castro a heaven-sent excuse for his own economic failures. But there is a difference between opposing the embargo and embracing Mr. Castro.
Let our business people do their grubby little deals with Mr. Castro.
Let our tourists flock to his beaches. Let our diplomats meet with his
diplomats. But let's never again send our prime minister to be the
backdrop for Mr. Castro's tirade. We don't need the sugar.