abcnews.go.com — By Marc Frank

HAVANA (Reuters) - Cubans voted in one-party general elections on Sunday, with President Fidel Castro saying the election showed defiance against U.S. efforts to destroy the country's communist revolution.

Dissidents dismissed the poll as a fraud and urged people to boycott it, but authorities said that 7.4 million people, or 89.6 percent of registered voters, had cast their ballots by early afternoon.

The election is held every five years to choose 609 deputies to the National Assembly and 1,119 representatives to provincial assemblies.

Voters have no choice of candidates which are equal to the number of open seats. They can check a box for all the candidates, or vote for one or more of them, or none.

The father of Elian Gonzalez, a young boy who survived a shipwreck that killed his mother while trying to reach the United States and whose later return to Cuba ignited fury among many Cuban Americans, was among those on the slate. Others included a mix of well-known leaders and personalities, such as singer Silvio Rodriguez as well local officials.

Castro, dressed in his traditional military uniform, cast his ballot as voters chanted "Fidel, Fidel" in the eastern city of Santiago de Cuba, where he stood for re-election to the National Assembly.

"This is a response to the empire in its efforts to destroy the revolution," Castro said, referring to the United States.

Dissident Vladimiro Roca, who was released from prison last year after serving a five-year sentence for opposition activity, had a different view. "This is not an election because in an election you can choose between different options. Here the only option is to continue as we are ... this is one of Fidel Castro's many frauds," he told Reuters.

Like other members of Cuba's small and hounded dissident movement which Havana charges works for the United States, Roca called on voters to boycott the polls or spoil their ballots.

DISSIDENTS OBSERVE POLLS

Some dissidents went to polling stations to observe the vote count when they closed. Roca told Reuters he was allowed to observe, but another dissident, Martha Beatriz Roque, was turned away. Roque said some 200 dissidents participated in the action countrywide and a full report would be issued on Wednesday.

It is the first election since dissidents in May delivered 11,000 signatures to the government requesting a referendum on electoral reforms, the right to operate private businesses, more civil rights and amnesty for political prisoners.

Cuba's constitution requires petitions signed by more than 10,000 voters be considered for a referendum vote.

Asked in Santiago de Cuba why the government has not directly responded to the initiative, named the Varela Project after an 18th century priest and independence hero, Castro said it was not worth even discussing.

"Do you think in a country as serious, hard working and heroic as this we are going to pay attention to such foolishness," Castro said, charging that the project was invented by the U.S. Interests Section in Havana.

The United States and Cuba do not have diplomatic relations but maintain interests sections in each other's capitals. Washington has maintained an economic embargo against Cuba for more than 40 years and worked to isolate the government.

Castro, 76, was expected to be sent back to parliament, which will elect the Council of State. That body designates the President of the Republic and Castro, in power for 44 years, is expected to be chosen for another five-year term.

Castro defended Cuba's electoral system to reporters, insisting that the country's only legal political organization, the Communist Party, had stayed out of the process.

Havana points to a traditional turnout of about 98 percent as proof of huge support for the government, while dissidents say it reflects voters' fears they will be ostracized if they do not participate.

Angela Ramirez, a housewife from Havana's La Lisa district, said she voted because it was her duty. "I support the system as the best possible. I would like more choice, but at least we are not in the situation Argentina or Venezuela is in," she said.

Other Cubans said they felt compelled to vote. "It may seem like you can vote or not, but if you don't you are marked, so it is in your interest to turn out," said Francisco, a taxi driver who cast his ballot in the Central Havana district.

www.granma.cu BY MIREYA CASTAÑEDA -Granma International staff writer-

PRESIDENT Fidel Castro spoke on the Cuban electoral system, increased popular interest in the general elections, the Revolution’s social programs and certain international issues after casting his vote at Electoral College No. 4, District 7, Santiago de Cuba.

The leader of the Revolution arrived at the constituency located at the Alejandro Urgellés sports complex on Avenida de las Américas in this eastern city of the island, at 10:00 a.m. on Sunday, January 19, the date convened for general elections for deputies to the National Assembly (609) and delegates to the Provincial Assemblies (1,100).

Fidel presented his documents at the electoral table and was given a green ballot (deputies) and a white one (delegates). He moved to the voting booth to exercise his constitutional right to a secret vote and deposited the ballots in the two boxes guarded by students.

A group of journalists from the national and international media were waiting at the college to ask the president questions, the first on his opinion of what is to be the new National Assembly.

Fidel replied that the new Parliament should be of higher quality than former ones, primarily because of the constant raising of the population’s educational level, and because the election system itself has been improved.

He recalled that the direct electoral system began in 1992 with the special period and observed how there is more experience today, such as greater contact between candidates and voters and the increased interest of the people in those who are to represent them.

In terms of representation, Fidel Castro reiterated that half of the deputies are nominated from the base (the other 50% by the social, student, trade union and campesino organizations) and all of them have to gain over half the valid votes cast to be elected.

In that context he explained some of the reasons for the united (block) vote, including a tendency to vote for known persons: distinguished scientists, intellectuals, professors or ministers as opposed to candidates from the base who are needed in the National Assembly.

He also referred to what he described as heartening data on the future composition of the National Assembly in terms of ethnic composition (32.96% black and mixed race), women (35.96%) and educational level (almost 98% university or senior high school graduates).

He commented on the positive aspect of more frequent visits by candidates in order to familiarize themselves with the people and their problems, and how there is a growing interest in the provincial municipalities to be well represented in a National Assembly that is gaining in prestige. “In any case,” he affirmed, “deputies represent the nation and all the people.

He noted that the data show a renovation in the nominations’ slate (where a lot of work has been done and also because new people have come forward); a certain reduction in the total of young people under 30 (16 years to be entitled to vote, but 18 to be nominated); and an increase in the 30-40 age group, which naturally has earned more merit.

The president responded to other questions on national issues, including the case of the five Cubans imprisoned in the United States and the recent article in The New York Times (to which Ricardo Alarcón, president of the Cuban Parliament, made an ample response a few days ago), published at this point to counteract active campaigning on their behalf.

He stressed that the trial of the Five, who are political prisoners, was shameful and rigged, and resulted in two life sentences. However the Five are providing an example of dignity, and the international press has not made any mention of that, he noted.

“On the other hand, that same press takes it upon itself to circulate anything on the so-called dissidents in Cuba, whom everybody knows are incubated in the U.S. Interest Section.”

Fidel observed that that institution has no weight, no influence on anything, because there is a political culture in Cuba and serious and hardworking people are not going to bother themselves with trivialities. “All those things are part of the empire’s useless attempts to destroy and divide us.”

In relation to events in Latin America (Brazil, Ecuador), the president was asked if he felt “less alone,” to which he replied that he had never felt alone, not even in a prison cell. “If you have confidence in your ideas, in what you are doing, you will never be alone, and I have seen the growth in the number of people who support us, both within and without,” he commented.

He reflected that changes in history are associated with objective factors and thus what is occurring in Latin America today is the fruit of crisis, of the unsustainable economic order.

Venezuela was another issue he was asked to comment on, particularly the fact that President Hugo Chávez has asked for Cuba’s inclusion in the Group of Friendship.

Fidel stated that it is a delicate issue, affirming that in principle he is against any outside interference, because persons arrive as friends and end up as proconsuls, because when outsiders get involved they turn into interveners.

He noted that the ideas of the Group of Friends of Venezuela arose to support the legitimate government, but has been transformed and is acting belligerently by recognizing and encouraging the fascists; one only has to analyze the composition of the group to draw those conclusions.

“The gentlemen from the North are going to use their instruments,” he added, “given that the Organization of American States has a dubious history, with its expulsion of Cuba, its failure to act when the Dominican Republic and Panama were invaded, or in Guatemala where 200,000 people disappeared.

“I imagine that many Venezuelans are concerned about this group,” he continued, “with people like Reich and Noriega heading Latin American Affairs in the Bush administration. And Spain, an unconditional U.S. ally. They prevented me from going to Mexico and various governments backed the coup against Chávez. Are those people going to mediate between a legitimate government and the fascists who organized the coup? Venezuela’s enemies are dominant within this group under the baton of the head of a unipolar world. It’s a plan, a maneuver, a project to destroy the Venezuelan process,” he emphasized.

Fidel affirmed: “Chávez is a friend, a very noble man with a great love for his people, a man educated in the thinking of Bolívar and Martí, respectful of the law, decisive and intelligent, “and if he asks us for something, he knows that he can count on our sympathy and support. However we would have to assess it carefully, because gestures can turn into intervention, and do away with the country’s sovereignty.”

BEFORE THE PEOPLE OF SANTIAGO

The people had gathered outside the Electoral College, acclaiming Fidel, and the president stopped. He began by paraphrasing the famous phrase ‘I came, I saw and I conquered.’ Fidel said: “I came, I saw and I voted,” and confirmed that the people could say exactly the same thing.

The president expressed his belief that in more than 30 years of the institutional process never before had elections been preceded by so much enthusiasm.

He explained how our revolutionary and socialist democracy has been steadily improved and that now the Cuban people know why they vote, not like before 1959, he recalled, when those with money were elected or won by fraudulent means. Then being a political agent was a profession. What kind of democracy was that?

He then asked how many of the people gathered there were political agents, or were given money to vote, or what kind of money the candidate had, how he was nominated and who elected the constituency delegates. “You have elected, all the citizens who wanted to stand for the Assembly were nominated and elected by you.”

“This little country 90 miles from the most powerful empire ever to have existed has never been defeated throughout 44 years,” Fidel noted, “because a Revolution is also a battle of ideas, and we used arms well when our land was invaded at the Bay of Pigs, or when they killed teachers, and nobody can make up stories about that,” he stressed, “because during the October Crisis I never saw any comrade vacillate, and nobody came to inspect us.

“We have been able to resist more than 30 years of blockade, more than 10 years of special period, when we were left without fuel, spare parts, and certain people believed that the Revolution wouldn’t last a week, or 24 hours. And 10 years have gone by and here is the Revolution, stronger than ever,” the president confirmed.

“Today the people are more aware and more united than ever, and are participating in the most just elections that could be found anywhere in the world,” he continued, “a people with absolute equality of rights.”

The leader of the revolution referred to the 100-plus social programs being developed on the island, to studies on malnutrition, mental backwardness, and physical malformation, to the profound educational revolution and the tremendous labors in the field of public health.

He outlined the number of medical faculties, family doctors, research into cancer, hospitals and affirmed: “These labors are for everyone, nobody is going to ask any U.S. Interest Section employee in pain anything, they will treat him or her and save his or her life; that is socialism, humanism.

Finally, President Fidel Castro expressed his optimism, his joy at what the country is today: a standard of justice, liberty, and a decorous level of education and living standards. “There is nothing we propose that we cannot obtain, that is what I am saying on this glorious, dignified and joyful day of our general elections.”

www.washingtonpost.com Send your comments, questions, and tips to Marcela Sanchez. Envie sus comentarios, preguntas e ideas a Marcela Sanchez. Special to washingtonpost.com Thursday, January 9, 2003; 12:15 PM

After receiving a travel permit "inexplicably," Cuban dissident Oswaldo Payá arrived in Washington this week. He came by way of Europe determined to continue spreading the word about the difficulties of life on an island where, he said, one can feel imprisoned without being in prison. He had an audience with no less than the U.S. secretary of state, Colin L. Powell, among others. Score one--a big one--for the Cuban opposition, many would say.

Yet even before Payá could set foot on the sidewalk at the State Department's headquarters, his Varela Project that collects signatures in favor of a peaceful and democratic transition on the island was under criticism from a familiar stronghold of Cuban diplomacy--Miami's Little Havana.

A group of Cuban American organizations cast doubt on the value of Paya's meeting, asserting over the weekend that the Varela Project "would legitimize the absolute powers and abuses" by the Castro government and "undermine" the work of other democracy groups.

Not everyone in Little Havana agreed with that view, yet the message seemed to strike the same tone critical of the Bush administration that came this week from the traditional Cuban American leadership voices in this capital. In numerous interviews, they complained anew of the lack of a clear White House policy for the hemisphere-including, of course, Cuba.

Much of Latin America looks to the beginning of Bush's third year with skepticism. It is understandable that Mexicans and Argentines speak of White House neglect. It is rather startling that Cuban Americans do so, too.

Bush, after all, began his term expressing gratitude for the Cuban American support that helped put him there, particularly that from South Florida. He made Mel R. Martinez the first Cuban American named to a Cabinet-level position and selected another, Otto J. Reich, to direct U.S. foreign policy in the Western Hemisphere. He ignored criticism that he was paying a political debt by handing the Latin America portfolio to Cuban exiles.

The verbal dustup over the last several days here was further proof to some that U.S. policymakers are distancing themselves from Little Havana. It was also a sign that U.S. economic interests seeking to end the trade embargo are having more influence on U.S. Cuba policy. This explains why Cuban-American leaders once thought to have ample influence at the White House are becoming more openly dissatisfied with Bush, even as he pursues an international campaign against terrorism.

Cuba is the only country in the hemisphere on the U.S. list of states that sponsor terrorism, they argue, and also has some capability to develop biological weapons. It spies on the United States and offers refuge to terrorists, they add. Doesn't that justify a more aggressive policy toward the Castro regime?

Yet the fact is that the Bush administration has arguably been no tougher on Cuba than its predecessors were. And Reich's appointment, forced to be temporary because of congressional opposition, has lapsed. On Thursday, the White House appointed him to a new post in the National Security Council not requiring congressional confirmation.

In response to the criticism of the meeting with Payá, a State Department spokesman said the session provided a rare opportunity to become familiar with the efforts of one very well-known leader of the freedom movement in Cuba, and added that Cuba now has a "constellation" of such activists worthy of recognition.

Another official acknowledged that the Cuban American community expects Bush to do more. But he insisted that Bush would continue to keep tough trade restrictions on the island, even though the official agreed with Payá that the solution for Cuba needs to become "de-Americanized." Neither the embargo, nor more tourists, investors or trade will be factors for change, said Payá, if Cubans continue living in fear and exclusion.

More than 40 years should have been enough to make it clear that the hard-line U.S. anti-Castro policy has not resulted in the hoped-for democratic changes on the island. And it is precisely for that reason that some here suspect that the real aim of the Cuban American community, and its emphasis on Castro as a terrorist threat, is to assure that these very policies will not be softened, even as more voices, especially in Congress, are calling for just that.

The real problem here may be one of expectations, of those looking to Washington to deliver more than it really can. The Cuban American community, as well as those from other Latin American countries in crisis, must accept a difficult reality: Often true change comes only from within, from initiatives like those of Payá, no matter how modest they may seem.

www.granma.cu

HAUNTED by his past as a liar and unable to present himself before the Senate without risking humiliation, Otto Reich is now suffering from a reshuffle in the labyrinth of the U.S. administration, which is persisting in keeping him active and fulfilling his obligations to the Miami mafia in spite of all the setbacks. The King of Deception’s position has gone to another eminent emissary of the South Florida gang, Roger Noriega, an activist/official whose anti-Cuban fanaticism is matched only by his mediocrity.

In spite of the disastrous situation in Latin America, the U.S. administration has opted to continue to satisfy the mafia capos and maintain anti-Cuban zealots in the State Department at a moment when the Senate and House of Representatives are at the point of dealing fatal blows to the obsolete legislation of the blockade against Cuba. Commentaries circulating in Washington suggest that Powell tried to eliminate Reich by giving him a minor position, but balked in the light of protests transmitted on the “hot lines” of the Miami mafia radio stations.

Once the State Department’s Number One in Latin American affairs, Reich has been assigned by the president to a made-to-measure position as “Special Envoy for Western Hemispheric Initiatives,” with an office in the neighboring Executive Building next to the White House.

And what might that position be?

Well, according to White House Spokesperson Ari Fleischer, Reich is to coordinate relations between the United States and Mexico (wasn’t that Jorge Castañeda’s job?), the Andes Anti-Drug Initiative, “aspects of Cuba policy,” and “Homeland security issues in the Caribbean.”

He now finds himself under the authority of National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice.

Reich was under-secretary of state until November 22, but declined to solicit the Senate’s blessing due to his embarrassing role in the Iran-Contra Scandal and? his scandalous collaboration with coup plotters in Venezuela in April last year.

Roger F. Noriega, 43, is leaving his post as ambassador to the Organization of American States, where his fame as a mediocre diplomat precedes him? despite his many years of close collaboration with Senator Jesse Helms, now retired. J.G.A.

www.iht.com Adam Cohen Wednesday, January 15, 2003 A pointless policy   HAVANA Cuba's oddest tourist attraction may well be the Rincón de los Cretinos, or Corner of Cretins. Tucked into a dim hallway of the Museum of the Revolution, it features life-size caricatures of Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. The plaque beside Reagan reads, "Thanks you cretin for helping us to strengthen the revolution." The first President Bush is thanked for helping to "consolidate" the revolution.

It is great Communist kitsch, but also dead-on political commentary. America's hard-line Cuba policy, particularly the embargo on trade and tourism, is cruel to 11 million Cubans, who live in poverty as a result of the embargo. And it makes America look loutish to the world community, which has denounced the embargo in the United Nations for the last 11 years, most recently by a vote of 173 to 3.

The embargo is also inane strategically because it does just the opposite of what its supporters intend. By insulating Cuba from U.S. economic influence, and from most Americans, conservatives have indeed "strengthened" and "consolidated" Cuban Communism in the name of trying to pull it down.

Momentum is building fast to bring an end to Washington's benighted policies. Cuba watchers have long said that relations will not change until Fidel Castro, who is 76, departs. But now members of Congress, Republicans as well as Democrats, are vowing to undo the embargo, and they are taking aim at its cornerstone: the ban on tourism.

Cuba is a hot tourist spot these days - for Europeans and for 200,000 Americans a year, who go legally, under exceptions to the ban, and illegally. It has many of the usual tropical charms: enjoying moonlight and mojitos at the Hotel Nacional, chasing Hemingway's ghost around Old Havana. But what sets it apart is that in a world grown homogenous, it still delivers a frisson of exoticism, just 90 miles off the coast of Florida.

The revolution, and the four decades of embargo that followed, locked Cuba into a late-'50s freeze-frame. Many of the cars careering down Havana's streets are, famously, '57 Chevys. Few buildings are newer than the Riviera, the Miami Beach-style hotel where Rat Packers once roamed and Meyer Lansky ran the casino.

The embargo's most striking visual impact is that it has spared Cuba the detritus of U.S. capitalism. Havana's quaint Parquo Central has no golden arches or Starbucks. The Malecón, Havana's charming seafront boulevard - lined on one side by crumbling architectural gems, on the other by crashing waves - is billboard-free. It has as much Old World romance as any spot a traveler is likely to come upon.

To visit Cuba is to be a student of history, with a new set of lessons. Cubans see their engagement with the United States as part of a centuries-long struggle to throw off the colonial yoke - first Spain's, then America's.

Cubans view Castro's revolution, which deposed the U.S.-backed dictator, Fulgencio Batista, as less about Marxism than about finally winning self-determination. And they see the embargo, like the Bay of Pigs invasion and the CIA's many attempts on Castro's life, as a fit of pique by a superpower that hasn't forgiven the little island that slipped from its grasp.

For an administration that seeks "moral clarity" in foreign policy, the embargo offers anything but. Cuba is oppressive - it lacks freedom of speech and real elections - but is not much different than China and other nations that trade with the United States.

The embargo is especially wrongheaded in these complicated times. It hands more ammunition to critics who accuse Washington of flouting world opinion. And it particularly sets the United States back in Latin America, where two strategically vital nations - Venezuela and Brazil - now have leaders who see Castro as a compañero.

The embargo - and above all the travel ban - also frays America's own democratic principles. It makes no sense to protest Cubans' lack of freedom by depriving American citizens of theirs.

It is Miami's Cubans, of course, who are driving all this. The community is not as uniformly hard-line as it once was; young Cuban-Americans, in particular, are starting to speak out for normalization. But President George W. Bush still owes his win in Florida, and his presidency, to the Hands-Off-Elian-González crowd.

Things are different, however, in Congress. The bipartisan Cuba Working Group is pushing hard to end the embargo because it is the right thing to do, and because its members' constituents - farmers, factory hands, dockworkers - pay the price.

Congress eased the embargo in 2000, authorizing sales of food and medicine, on a cash basis only. Jeff Flake, a conservative Arizona Republican who opposes the embargo, expects the travel ban to unravel in the next year. "We're getting dangerously close to veto-proof majorities," he said.

The embargo's end will improve the lives of ordinary Cubans. It could even topple the current regime by unleashing the power of capitalism on a country that has long been protected from it. But these changes will come at the cost of an onslaught of American culture, lobbed from 90 miles away.

Which means that in these crazy times, when it's difficult to see even one step into the future in many parts of the world, in Cuba it is possible to see two: the end of the embargo and - just as inevitably - embargo nostalgia.