Everyone knows that Cuba has been going through an acute crisis in the past few years, a crisis in part the result of the US policy of destabilization (the economic blockade), in part the result of the collapse of the socialist countries, and in part – and this is left out of the contributing factors but ought not to be – the result of the virtual recolonization of the Third World with its sharply deteriorating situation vis-a-vis the advanced capitalist countries, its unprecedented plunder by the imperialists, its enslavement to the prescriptions of the IMF/World Bank, and its loss of political independence. The growing calamity of the Third World has had a devastating impact on Cuba, as well. And this should be examined in detail at another time.
So the Third World is in a state of crisis and the former socialist countries are in a state of crisis. But let it not be thought that the condition of the advanced capitalist countries is healthy. Quite the contrary. They, too, are in a state of crisis, a crisis which has been mitigated by their robbery of the Third World. On the one hand, however, that robber is proving less and less effective in cushioning the economies of the imperialist states; and on the other hand, the Third World is becoming so drained that the booty must sooner or later give out.
All this needs to be said in order to place the Cuban situation in the necessary context. Cuba is not plunging into an abyss while the rest of the world basks in prosperity. Further, the fundamentally inequitable nature of other Third World societies serves to mask the magnitude of their problems, while in Cuba, just the opposite is the case. For example, in most Third World countries one may find a glittering capital city, abundant goods, transportation and services within a comparatively small radius – just the radius covered by the world media and foreign tourists. But once beyond that tiny zone of prosperity, there is the dark and silent reality of starvation, rampant disease, illiteracy, and homelessness. For Cuba, the crisis has been equitably shared, observable in the capital no less than in the mountain areas. Poverty is everywhere. But the basic life support systems remain for all – education, housing, healthcare, and culture.
Recently, it is true, the reality has been slowly changing. Foreign investment, previously resisted, is now being encouraged. The tourist trade is being developed, which is generating a number of negative social phenomena, including inequality. A number of services are being privatized. Cuban farmers are being given more freedom to sell part of their produce commercially. Even investments involving 100 per cent foreign capital are being prepared for.
The world bourgeoisie is gleeful. The imminent demise of the socialist system and the fall of the socialist government is confidently predicted. And how could the bourgeoisie and their hired hands think otherwise in this New World Order, where everyone has been “structurally adjusted” by the IMF chiropractors who leave the spinal columns of the Third World economies not only cracked but broken?
But surprisingly, there are those on the Left who have likewise joined the chorus of the doomsayers. And in some cases one gets the impression that their dire predictions on the future of Cuban socialism are uttered not with a sigh but with the same malevolence as those of their co-thinkers on the Right. For example, in touting its new publication on Cuba, the Monthly Review Press tells us: “After thirty-five years of one-party rule, the island stands on the brink of dramatic change. With its economy strained to the breaking point by the collapse of the Eastern bloc and its people suffering increasing hardship, Cuba’s unique political and social structures are close to collapse.”
On October 23, 1995, Weekly News Update, a publication which supports human rights, democracy, and social progress in Latin America, published a supplement headed “Cuba’s Free Market Conversion Continues”. And after detailing the increasing foreign investment in Cuba, Fidel is quoted as saying that “Cuba will not rush to embrace capitalism the way the former Soviet Union did, but will follow the ‘gradual path’ practiced by China and Vietnam.”
Among the examples of what it calls “Cuba’s rapid transformation toward an investment-friendly market economy” Weekly News Update cites plans to have 80 percent of agricultural land farmed by cooperatives rather than state farms. But cooperative farms always predominated over state farms, in the Soviet Union and other socialist countries, and were viewed as a form of socialist property. To use this as an illustration of the move toward a market economy would seem to be somewhat disingenuous.
The Update continues that “Cuba is now being held up as an example of the inevitability of the International Monetary Fund type structural adjustment policies.” And the Update calls attention to the fact that “there has been no widespread social unrest since the anti-government protests of August 5, 1994” (we pass over whether the events of August 5th were indeed indicative of widespread social unrest) and that “unlike in other Latin American countries facing layoffs and privatization, there have been no protests from organize labor.”: Yet strangely, the Update finds it of no particular interest to delve into the reasons for this lack of protest. Perhaps it might vitiate the central thrust of their presentation…
Finally, the Update‘s conclusion: “Many in Cuba feel that the collapse of national industry, combined with allowing foreign capital to exploit the country’s oil, sugar and nickel resources, signal a return to pre-Revolutionary neocolonialism. One former state employee told Marc Cooper, “Cuba has become like the Third World countries we studied in college. Like Egypt, but worse. In Egypt no one ever had the illusions and hopes we had.”
Yet somehow, the usually well-informed New York Times has failed to receive word about Cuba’s new commitment to capitalism. In the same week as appeared the Update article, The Times published an editorial entitled “Cuban Anachronisms” in which Fidel is described as having “an unbending allegiance to Cuban Socialism.” And The Times goes on, “He has shown little willingness to consider the economic or political reforms that would make it much easier for Washington to justify a change in course.”
One of the important features of the collapse of socialism in the Soviet Union, as well as elsewhere, was that it was prepared by an intense campaign of historical and ideological revision, thereby psychologically preparing the people for capitalist restoration. For a number of years under Gorbachev the historical achievements of the Soviet Union were denigrated, the Soviet past was slandered, Marxist-Leninist ideology – at first cautiously and then with growing boldness – was ridiculed and denounced. But rather than calling Cuba’s socialist history into question, Fidel and his colleagues continually remind their people of the glory of that history. Rather than calling into question the ideological foundations of socialism, Fidel and his colleagues staunchly defend the continued validity of those principles. In his speech to the youth on August 6th of 1995, Fidel speaks of “the noblest and deepest conviction which has ever existed. I’m referring to the revolutionary and communist conviction.” Earlier, on the July 26th anniversary, frankly discussing the “unquestionable capitalist elements introduced into our country” which “have been accompanied by the damaging and alienating effects of that system,” he says “Does this maybe signify the renunciation of our socialist ideals and our Marxist-Leninist convictions? Quite the contrary…As true Marxist-Leninists we have to take this course of action, with all the courage and realism demanded by the circumstances. However, this does not imply, as some people think, a return to capitalism”. Contrast that with the attitude of those former Communist leaders, including Gorbachev, who sing the praises of the “market economy” and “free enterprise”. Cuba has indeed introduced capitalist elements into its economy, but it’s presented not as a god thing but as a necessary evil. Says Fidel, “Some of our friends have advised us to say no, that we are doing this because it’s a very good thing. We have to be honest, we have gone down this road because it was the only alternative to saving the Revolution and saving the conquests of Socialism.”
The Cuban leadership are accused of accepting the neoliberal project. Again, Fidel: “Now neoliberal theoreticians are trying to work out how to combat unemployment, in the same way that the large banking institutions are discussing what to do in terms of social development. But the fundamental problem is this: capitalism and social development always have been, always are, and always will be irreconcilable. Capitalism and plunder, plunder within and outside the country, are inseparable. Capitalism and unemployment are inseparable.” If Fidel is trying to pave the way for neoliberalism, he is showing himself to be a rather stupid politician. But not even his enemies have accused him of this.
Why, then has Cuba embarked on the road of accepting certain capitalist elements? Fidel: “if we were a country with significant resources, perhaps we wouldn’t have gone for large-scale tourism development. From experience, we all know the consequences of large-scale tourism development; however, given the existing conditions in our country, we couldn’t do without it…We had to choose: before a factory remained shut down, deteriorated completely, or was lost, if some capitalist entrepreneur appeared who was willing to become our business partner it would have been absurd not to have accepted…When the socialist camp collapsed, thousands of factories were without fuel, without electricity, without raw materials, without spare parts.”
Deals are being made with foreign investors, and still practically everything remains in Cuban hands, the economy has not collapsed, and in fact for the first time in years there has been a rise in the Gross Domestic Product.
The Weekly News Update would have us believe that Cuba has taken the IMF structural adjustment route. Nothing could be further from the truth. Law No. 77 which provides the legal framework for foreign investment is replete with safeguards on behalf of the Cuban workers, safeguards on behalf of the environment, safeguards on behalf of the Cuban state and economy. It is notorious that in other Third World countries the structural adjustment programs are predicated on the unfettered, brutal exploitation of the workforce, almost always non-unionized and kept non-unionized through the cooperation of the host government. In Cuba, the Cuban state controls the hiring and firing of workers even in the case of foreign investment. The workers are unionized, with the blessings of the state, and foreign investors must abide by a rigorous labor code. Moreover, investors must contribute substantially toward the standard social security benefits to which cubans are entitled.
Unlike the situation in other Third World countries, investors must abide by state environmental regulations. And should they violate them, they must restore the environment to its previous condition. Finally, unlike the situation in other Third World countries where investors are granted substantial tax breaks or even a tax-free haven, investors in Cuba must pay substantial taxes to the state. There is no plan for large-scale privatization of industry and basic services. To assert that Cuba has embraced IMF structural adjustment reflects at best a woeful ignorance of the real situation, and if it is not ignorance, then – No, we will refrain from speculating on the motive.
So the monies that Cuba receives from foreign investment are being used to strengthen its national economy, give it the means to operate in the dog-eat-dog conditions of the present capitalist world market, give it the means to put its people to work, restore its energy and transportation systems, restore the high-level diet which the Cuban people had enjoyed previously.
While foreign investment in other Third World countries results in the takeover of key sectors of the economy, the undermining of national sovereignty, and the subordination of the economy as a whole to the profit requirements of the transnational corporations, in Cuba the idea is to take advantage of the profit lust of foreign capital to strengthen Cuba’s socialist foundation, to shore up popular rule, and in the long run to permit Cuba to once again rid itself of foreign capital.
That Cuba has not renounced socialism is clear in the unrelenting hostility of the US rulers. While they may disagree on means – some opting for a more subtle effort to overthrow the Cuban system – the power structure is united in its determination to overthrow Cuban socialism, Cuban democracy, and Cuban self-determination. But Cuba will never surrender. As Fidel said in his speech on April 12, “Some day this craziness will have to be replaced with peace, but peace with dignity, peace with respect, peace with revolution, peace with social justice, peace with the preservation of all the achievements of socialism, and peace with our most absolute right to continue constructing socialism when the objective circumstances permit it.” Says Fidel:
“The key, comrades and friends, the key to all this is power. Who holds power, the big landowners, the bourgeoisie, the wealthy? The question of power is key.”
Yes, the Cuban revolution is in retreat – but it is an orderly retreat. Yes, the Cuban revolution is bending – but it is bending so that it does not snap. And rest assured, friends and foes of the Cuban revolution, it shall not snap!
