Related articles:

Tucson Cubans expect little to change with Castro's resignation Long reign of Castro is at an end My opinion Andrés Oppenheimer : Changes in Cuba will be slow, incremental Tucson Cuban-Americans are wait-and-see over end of Castro After Fidel Castro's resignation, extent of his power remains unclear Raul Castro named Cuba's president as communists endure

Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Health Care
Sierra Tucson
Eating Disorders Program Coordinator General
A1 Communications
Cable Techs

The following editorial appeared in the Miami Herald on Wednesday:

NEW 'PRESIDENT,' SAME OLD DICTATORSHIP

Fidel Castro, Cuba's dictator for almost five decades, relinquished his official title Tuesday. Still, he is not gone, and his influence will continue. His official successor as "president" may attempt some modest reform. However, serious political and democratic freedom will remain a dream deferred.

The end of Cuba's totalitarian era is closer, but there is still no telling when real change might begin. This explains the subdued reaction of Cubans on the island and in Miami. As long as Castro is physically capable, he will use his considerable personal power to hold up the failed communist system. Even in his resignation notice, he promised to continue writing his "Reflections," a series of editorials that regularly skewer the proposals of his designated successor, brother Raúl.

The notice comes as Cuba's political elites prepare to name the members and president of the Council of State on Sunday. The council president is considered Cuba's official leader, even though none of the candidates has been selected in anything resembling a free, democratic election.

The odds are that the new "president" will be Raúl Castro, who has been provisional ruler since his brother's health crisis in 2006. But that is not certain.

Regardless of who takes the title, that person's power will be limited not only by Fidel Castro but by the growing frustration of Cuba's people. They are the ones suffering the country's economic and moral decay. Raúl Castro let the genie out of the bottle when he solicited criticisms of the system. That was reflected in the students who recently grilled high-ranking official Ricardo Alarcon, who didn't give straight answers. A leaked video showcased their uncomfortable questions:

Why can't Cubans travel freely? Why do Cubans get paid nearly worthless salaries? Why isn't the economy more productive? Why are Cubans barred from hotels and restaurants for tourists? Why vote for National Assembly members when Cubans don't even know the candidates?

Cuban dissidents have been asking those questions for years. And they have been persecuted and imprisoned for doing so.

At this point, any reform that could provide relief for ordinary Cubans would be an improvement. After nearly 50 years of suffocating control, Cubans are fed up with the bankrupt system. New leadership will risk losing control altogether if it doesn't provide some hope. Promises alone won't do.

This turning point provides a good opportunity to support Cuba's dissidents and increase pressure on Cuba's political elites to initiate democratic change. The United States and other democratic nations should use their diplomatic powers to end the world's longest lasting dictatorship.

———

The following editorial appeared in the Chicago Tribune on Wednesday:

Not much has changed in the 19 months since an ailing Fidel Castro passed the wheel to his little brother, Raúl. The younger Castro doesn't go for his brother's famous fire-and-brimstone act, and he's reportedly more open to economic reform and less enamored of the flaming socialist agenda pushed by Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. But Raúl Castro is running Cuba in the same sense that a substitute teacher runs a 4th-grade classroom, and everyone knows it.

So don't get too excited about Fidel's announcement that he's officially resigning after nearly half a century at the top. "I will neither aspire to nor accept the positions of President of the State Council and Commander in Chief," he said in a statement posted Tuesday on the state-run newspaper, Granma. The National Assembly, which meets Sunday to fill those posts, is now free to elect Raúl — or someone else, we suppose — to pretend to be president.

If anything, Raúl's tenure attests to the strength of the revolutionary institutions, particularly the military and the Communist Party. Though food and housing remain scarce and wages remain low, the changing of the guard hasn't led to the unrest and instability the U.S. government and Miami's Cuban exile community had hoped for.

Fidel always blamed Cuba's economic troubles on Washington, and Cubans never found it hard to believe, given the U.S. restrictions on trade, travel and money sent to relatives on the island. "The adversary to be defeated is extremely strong; however, we have been able to keep it at bay for half a century," Fidel wrote in his resignation message.

The us-vs.-them talk always made the daily struggle easier for Cubans to swallow. President Bush only reinforced that mindset Tuesday, insisting again that the U.S. won't lift the sanctions that squeeze the Cuban people until they get rid of their government and install one like ours.

Raúl Castro's approach to governing — call it "Fidel Lite" — has been marked by cautious reforms meant to improve the daily lives of Cubans. Though Raúl admires the Chinese model of state-sponsored capitalism, so far, he has effected change mostly by looking the other way. His government has done little, for example, to inhibit Cubans' growing enthusiasm for trading their government-owned homes, sometimes—gasp—making a profit from the exchange. It's not clear whether the practice reflects Cubans' barely restrained capitalist yearnings or simply their desire for running hot water. But if Uncle Sam stomps his foot and insists on a regime change while Raúl Castro or Hugo Chavez or whoever is working to put food on the table and a toilet in every apartment, then guess who the Cuban people will embrace when Fidel Castro is gone? But we're getting ahead of ourselves.

Come Sunday, Cuba will have a new president. But even in Miami, where the most fervent Castro-haters are watching and waiting, the celebration hasn't begun. Wake us up when he's dead.

The following editorial appeared in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on Wednesday:

Fidel Castro's role in the history of Cuba is nicely summed up in the way the news of his retirement spread Tuesday. It was a huge story that flashed around the world as soon as it was posted on the online edition of Granma, Cuba's Communist Party newspaper. But Cubans themselves were unlikely to have seen that initial report, because it was early morning, and they are barred from having Internet access in their homes.

Cubans have known many such paradoxes during their 49 years under Castro, the only president their country has had since he led its revolution against the Batista regime in the 1950s. They have accomplished notable successes — with literacy and infant mortality rates better than ours, and a life expectancy nearly as long — while laboring under a heavy-handed dictatorship that punishes political dissent and unconscionably limits freedom of expression. Once the golden child of Soviet client states — a scant 90 miles from the hated America — Cuba suffered the Soviet decline and stood stubbornly as a Cold War orphan after communism collapsed.

Through all those changes, the unmovable force in Cuba's life was Castro. From the very first, he and his regime have withstood an amazing array of challenges: assassination plots, the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the American-led trade embargo and the loss of Soviet aid that had helped it withstand that embargo. And for every challenge faced there was an opportunity missed — in trade, tourism, cultural exchange and a hundred other areas. Intransigence on both sides was preserved at a heavy cost. Estimates suggest that the embargo costs U.S. companies $1.2 billion a year. The cost just to Minnesota was hinted at in 2002, when Gov. Jesse Ventura led a quixotic trade mission to a country with which trade is mostly illegal. Despite that obvious stumbling block, the effort demonstrated a pent-up demand for commerce and other relations.

President John F. Kennedy, who ordered the embargo in 1962, was careful first to lay in a supply of Cuban cigars. Just as the embargo worked against his personal interest, it works today against the national interest. Trade can be the United States' most potent weapon in subverting a dictatorship, because it builds person-to-person relationships that can bypass the controls of government. Likewise, enforcing a trade ban can help prop up a dictatorship by giving it a villain to blame for its shortcomings. It's past time the United States removed that prop, and Castro's retirement offers an opportunity to do so.

Once that barrier is removed, the United States and Cuba should proceed to the next logical, overdue step: diplomatic relations. If the United States can recognize Vietnam and China, there's no reason to snub little Cuba — except, of course, the political clout of anti-Castro Cuban exiles in Florida. That community has wielded too much influence for too long. Now it should set aside its animosity and answer President Bush's call to help Cubans build the institutions of democracy. If Cuba is to move toward something resembling popular rule, it will need an infrastructure — independent courts, an unfettered media, academic freedom at colleges and universities — to support it.

Castro's Cuba is a textbook example of a country governed through a cult of personality, such as Hugo Chavez dreams of creating in Venezuela and the delusional Kim Jong-il thinks he has achieved in North Korea. It is the sort of rule that, deprived of its leader, turns to a relative as next best choice. That's what appears likely to happen in Cuba as Castro's brother, Raúl, takes the reins. We hope that Raúl's tenure in office is short and that his country begins the difficult process of democratic reform.

Even in retirement, Fidel is likely to remain the most prominent feature of Cuba's political landscape. He is, after all, the most resilient national leader of two centuries. Those who have waited long and eagerly for a post-Castro Cuba should relax; until we read not a retirement notice but an obituary, there won't be any such thing.

The following editorial appeared in the Kansas City Star on Wednesday:

Fidel Castro's decision to give up Cuba's presidency is an opportunity for the threesome vying for the U.S. presidency.

If nearly 50 years of economic sanctions against Cuba have proven one thing, it is that the U.S. can control more how it reacts to Cuba than it can affect what occurs within the island nation.

Without the lightning-rod presence of Castro, the U.S. will be freer to formulate a more effective approach to foster Cuban democracy.

All the leading presidential candidates — John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama — on Tuesday vowed to encourage Cuba toward democratic reforms. Each of the candidates rightly called for Cuba to release its political prisoners.

Obama noted that the Cuban people should determine their own future. Clinton said she would work with Latin America and Europe to encourage positive change in Cuba. McCain wisely noted that "freedom for the Cuban people is not yet at hand."

Castro has essentially been out of power since July 2006, when he had intestinal surgery.

His brother, Raúl Castro, will likely be chosen president and commander in chief on Sunday. There are indications that Raúl may be receptive to reforms, but Washington can't count on that.

The next occupant of the White House should not cling to the sanctions on Cuba that haven't worked for decades.

Bush administration policies have only worsened the situation by clamping down on the abilities of Cuban-Americans to send money or visit relatives on the island. These U.S. moves hurt families and left Castro unscathed.

Washington needs to pursue more constructive approaches to Cuba in the future.

The following editorial appeared in the Dallas Morning News on Wednesday:

Fidel Castro is calling it quits after nearly five decades as Cuba's communist dictator. Say goodbye to a Cold War era marked by assassination plots, a CIA-led invasion, a nuclear-missile crisis, Latin American guerrilla wars and massive boatlifts.

A parliamentary vote Sunday will determine whether Castro's brother, Raúl, ascends to the presidency or leadership passes to a younger generation. Change is coming to Cuba, and the U.S. can either seize this opportunity or squander it.

This newspaper opposes the U.S. economic embargo of Cuba because it never produced the regime change that Washington sought. It's time to modernize our approach to today's Cuba, just as we've adapted to the reality of a communist-ruled China.

The fastest way to bring about real change is to flood Cuba's shores with American goods and dollars. Allowing Americans to travel there will permit Cubans to absorb firsthand knowledge and counteract the propaganda they've been fed for decades about the evils of our capitalist system.

A more pragmatic leadership now is waiting to take over. Raúl Castro, 76, has spoken of a need to open dialogue with the United States. The White House should take advantage of this moment by minimizing the get-tough rhetoric and trying a new approach.

President Bush took a first step Tuesday by calling for international cooperation to help Cuba's democratic transition, but he couldn't help getting in a tweak about Havana's abysmal human rights record.

But China has a far worse record than Cuba. Beijing's diplomatic support and arms exports to Sudan have helped fuel the mass slaughter in Darfur. Yet the Bush administration has demonstrated that it can minimize abrasive rhetoric when it wants.

Any chance of dramatic change in Cuba, slim as it might be, will be heavily influenced by Washington's next move. It's time for both sides to recognize that the Cold War is over.

The following editorial appeared in the Seattle Times on Wednesday:

Time accomplished what an invasion, embargo, rhetoric and 49 years of wishful thinking could not. Cuban President Fidel Castro is stepping back from power.

At age 81, and in frail health since major surgery in 2006, the guerrilla fighter, revolutionary reformer and communist despot announced he would not seek re-election as president. He passed along authority to his second-in-command, brother Raúl, 76.Cuba struggles — an economic basket case since the collapse of the Soviet Union almost two decades ago. Without a patron willing to pay inflated prices for sugar and provide oil at steep discounts, the island limps along with empty stores and low wages.

Even Raúl Castro seemed to get what his brother did not or could not: It's time to rethink how the country operates. Without oil, the nation ought to be looking to biofuels. Raúl wanted to tap the energy in agricultural refuse. Fidel sat on those efforts.

Time has long passed for the United States to end its embargo of Cuba. The next U.S. president should help influence what comes next, instead of harrumphing about what might have been. U.S. policy on Cuba has been more attuned to Florida presidential politics than diplomatic relations in the Western Hemisphere. Washington's periodic fits of pique with Castro always gave Fidel a boost back home

An island closed to American visitors is an old favorite with Canadian and European tourists. Aggressive promotion of tourism might be the way the country opens after Fidel. State-run capitalism, a la China after the death of Mao Zedong, is the ready model to imagine — loosening the grip, but not letting go.

Eleven million willing hands, with government-paid health insurance, 90 miles offshore. U.S. light-manufacturing jobs would flock to Cuba, given the chance. Two generations of Cubans who grew up with a folk hero, limited opportunities and no political expression would be eager to entertain offers.

Cuba has a future. The U.S. can help shape the change to come with a new attitude of its own, and a quick end to the economic embargo.

Do it now, with a smile. Vex an old, ailing revolutionary.