NO DEBATE ON DICTATORS, PLEASE: WE ARE IRISH

Micheal Martin Prefers Solidarity
to Democracy
as a Goal in Foreign Policy

Micheal Martin’s abysmal record in Foreign Affairs is capped this week with his much-heralded visit to Cuba. That the Dail, the media and academia should fail to offer a proper critical evaluation of this initiative is confirmation that Ireland no longer has a culture of intelligent, pluralist debate on international relations and foreign policy.

Ireland and Cuba

Micheal Martin’s recent visit to Cuba has produced a considerable amount of press coverage, most of it unusually uncritical. Improving relations with Cuba is seen as uncontroversial. The inference is that Cuba is somehow a benign dictatorship. Opposition to the Castro  regime is viewed as “rabid” anti-Communism.

Several questions are raised by all of this and old Irish media, from the Irish Times to RTE and Newstalk, have mostly failed to address them properly.

Firstly, what is the nature of the Castro dictatorship and what is its future? Secondly, what does Micheal Martin’s visit  say about Irish foreign policy? And thirdly, why do Fianna Fail and Fine Gael pursue such policy positions when one might expect to see them shaping a more distinctive position? Finally, it would be interesting to hear the opinions of East Europeans in Ireland on Irish policy toward Cuba.

Cuba will be the last country in Latin America to undergo any kind of democratic transition in the wake of the most recent waves of democratization, those that saw both right-wing military regimes and leftist Communist regimes fall all over the world. The Irish Times recently featured articles hailing change in Cuba. Raul Castro appears to want a private sector role in agriculture and has loosened rules about mobile phone and pop consumer goods. Such changes were implemented by Janos Kadar’s Communist regime long before the end of the dictatorship. Castro insists that socialism will not be abandoned. The problem is that, like the Chinese, he sees censorship and dictatorship as even more fundamental to “socialism” than any of their economic policies. The real challenge that Cuba resists is that of democracy and human rights.

Micheal Martin had big themes on his visit. Cuba and Ireland shared something in common: by implication, we were little guys contending with big neighboring bullies. He didn’t put it that way. But that message came through clearer than Ireland’s desire for freedom in Cuba.

Ireland also opposes America’s embargo. Presumably, this is easier to say now because President Obama may open a dialog with the Castros too. But Obama has still defended the embargo. Obama is not a fascist or a warmonger. Is he just afraid of the Florida Cubans? Or is there a case for publicly arguing the case for democracy on the island?

The implication behind much of the Castro Worship in Ireland is that Cuba made a sovereign choice. But, by rejecting pluralistic elections, the Communists have created the kind of ambiguity we saw in Eastern Europe in the 1970s. Then, apologists assumed that passivity implied strong regime support, or at least forbearance. And, as I asked earlier, why should an opponent of Castro have less of a right to contest elections or criticize the Government than an opponent of Mugabe? I doubt that Mr. Martin would relegate democracy-speak to a private chat if he was visiting Harare.

Castro was part of the same global structure that oppressed people in Poland, Lithuania and the Czech lands in the 1970s. He opposed the Communist relin=quishment on power of 1989. Yes, his dictatorship was indigenous. And yes, it was less bloodthirsty than many others. And yes, there have been social gains. (On the latter, though, are we saying that a government with “good” policies has a right to rule by dictatorship if those policies might be rejected by voters? That’s the implication. On that logic, we would still have Jaruzelski in Poland if he could be counted on to provide more employment than Donald Tusk!).

Many East Europeans may oppose U.S. sanctions. However, East Europeans are more likely to take a tougher line on Castro than those in the West. We Irish have experience of a neighboring bully. So do they. But they could also tell the Minister about the nature of Communism and the value of democracy. Rabid anti-Communism was their revolutionary movement.

There is a pattern here. Martin takes a sideswipe at the United States. Under his leadership, Irish foreign policy becomes identified as the most anti-Israeli of all the European states. One would be forgiven for thinking that Ireland was a natural ally of Cuba, Viet Nam, Libya and the assorted strugglers against capitalism and imperialism. (We don’t, by the way, back North Korea). And, Syria? Micheal Martin had no problems whatsoever in promoting all-round good ties with Syria.

So why would these nominally conservative Fianna Fail Governments pursue such policies? Well, you don’t see much dissent from Fine Gael either. Except on Israel, of course. But that only exists because of the peculiar, if understandable  interests of the Jewish community and Jewish politicians.

The fact is that, beyond the EU and Anglo-Irish  issues, there is no culture of debate on foreign policy or international relations in Ireland. Irish TV documentaries, Irish Times analysis … all describe and interpret Latin American politics in a lexicon based on dependencia and condensed Marxian sociology. Perhaps it’s the residual influence of the Workers’ Party in RTE – hard to say. But Irish universities do not cultivate real debate on IR either, apart from internecine debates within the left (social democracy, Marxism, feminism and postmodernism). It is no wonder we are baffled by the East Europeans and find it difficult to make useful alliances with them on EU issues. While we fostered a conservative free market economy at home, we simultaneously produced a consensus, an orthodoxy on international issues that would fit easily into the rhetoric you hear on Radio Habana Cuba. Fianna Fail and Fine Gael politicians are so afraid of being criticized by the “progressive” media and “progressive” experts, that they just mouth this rhetoric on cue.

Next time Ireland talks about human rights, just recall the Cuba visit. When Cubans have their next revolution, let us ask where we were during their struggle. And, let us try to tell our Polish and Czech friends that supporting the European Union line on Cuba and on Syria is about …. promoting democracy??

Far from celebrating, Micheal Martin should now resign. But, of course, he will not. Moreover, his visit has not sparked any real debate in Dail Eireann, in the media or in academia. The new Irish foreign policy orthodoxy is well and truly established. Remember Michelle Obama and her “first” occasion to feel proud as an American? This week, this year, listening to Micheal Martin, listening to the silence of the nation, there is good cause to feel deeply ashamed of being Irish.