A BOY ON AN INNER TUBE BEFORE “ZERO TOLERANCE”

If you want to beat the political ramifications of inflicting major trauma on young children, it’s better to have thousands of victims rather than just one. That’s the lesson we’ve learned from the Trump administration’s toxic “zero tolerance” campaign. This is the border war that left toddlers bruised, battered and neglected, and forced infants, torn from their parents’ arms, to represent themselves in front of immigration judges.

Six weeks ago, the nation was transfixed by images of migrant children forcibly separated from their parents and placed in cages. A recording of screaming babies and toddlers wailing for “Mami!” and “Papá!” went viral, leaving listeners in chills and tears.

Six weeks is an eternity in our current political environment. During that span of time, our attention has been diverted to a whole string of shiny objects, including Trump’s Helsinki love fest with Putin, the failure of his imaginary peace with North Korea, his threats against Iran, audio of his plans for a Playboy model payoff, and a $12 billion bailout for farmers hurt by his trade war, among far too many others. It’s hard to keep the focus on the thousands of children torn from their parents, and emotionally maimed for life by the country that once welcomed immigrants with the words: “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free . . .”

Turn the clock back 19 years, to a simpler place and time, though it didn’t seem like it then. The nation was captivated by a similar story, except that this was a single 6-year-old migrant child, a Cuban separated from his parents while politicians fought bitterly over his fate. Elián González was found stranded on an inner tube near the Fort Lauderdale shoreline in 1999. Like the Central American parents caught up in Trump’s zero tolerance nightmare, Elián’s mother had been desperately searching for a better place to raise her son when they set sail on a rickety raft to escape deteriorating economic conditions. Sadly, she drowned en route. Elián was rescued by two fishermen and eventually taken in by extended family members in Miami – Elián’s great uncles – who had themselves fled Castro’s Cuba years earlier.

That might have been the end of the story if not for two salient subplots: Elián had entered the country illegally, and he had a father in Cuba who wanted him to come home. The battle lines were drawn. On one side was Miami’s anti-Castro Cuban community, fully backed by Republicans, insisting that poor, little Elián should be lovingly embraced by the welcoming America of his mother’s dreams. On the other side was the boy’s father, backed by the Castro government and Democrats on the basis that Elián was a Cuban citizen who, by rule of law in both countries, belonged with his father.

While the court battles raged on, Elián’s story evolved into a year-long media frenzy. By the end of 2000, the tale of this one child had been given the second largest volume of television coverage in U.S. history, surpassed only by the O.J. Simpson case. There were books, films, talk radio programs, songs, t-shirts, posters, art exhibits, murals, statues, documentaries, even a South Park episode devoted to the fate of this one young child. Ultimately, the federal courts determined that the government has a duty to “(reunite) unaccompanied alien children with a parent abroad. . .” To carry out that order, armed U.S. marshals stormed into the Miami home of Elián’s relatives, and removed the boy at gunpoint. He was ultimately reunited with his father in Cuba where he was treated like royalty by Fidel Castro. Elián is now an engineer and a frequent good will ambassador for the Cuban government.

What a difference two decades make. Donald Trump carried Florida in the 2016 election, in large part, with the backing of Miami’s Cuban-American immigrants who were still angry with the Clintons for supporting Elián’s return to Cuba. Brett Kavanaugh, the Republican attorney who unsuccessfully argued the case for keeping the boy in the U.S. so he could have a better life, is now the Supreme Court nominee of a president who ordered children snatched from their parents in order to keep “shithole” riffraff out of the country.

The biggest change, however, is in the numbers. Elián was a singular emblematic symbol who resonated with deep tones of empathy on both sides of the battle. His boyish face, his smiles, his tears were with us for 13 months, embedding themselves into the fabric of our lives, at a time of far fewer distractions.

We now have thousands of babies, toddlers, young children, separated from their parents and enduring forms of abuse that would trigger an immediate social service intervention in any jurisdiction. What we don’t have are their names or pictures. We don’t have anything resembling the Elián González story arc to keep this dystopian drama on the center stage of public life.

All we know is that 711 children remain in perpetual custody, with no end to their family separations in sight. One young toddler died of a respiratory illness after her release from a Texas detention center. A six-year-old girl was sexually assaulted in an Arizona lockup, and then forced to sign a form agreeing to keep her distance from her alleged assailant. Then she was molested again. A least 70 babies, all under a year old, have been hauled before immigration judges. They have no legal representation and are absurdly asked, by rules of the court, whether they understand the deportation proceedings against them.

Ivanka Trump this week called her father’s family separation plan the “low point” of his administration, as if this brutal, premeditated assault on humanity was a mere past tense blip. Hardly. The government, which was warned in advance of launching this draconian immigration offensive that separating children from their parents would cause “traumatic psychological injury”, says 460 parents of kids in federal custody have already been deported. Nobody knows what will become of their children, now languishing in unsafe and unregulated makeshift detention facilities.

Republicans once saw America as a welcoming beacon in the night to little Elián on his inner tube. No more. They are now enabling a broken and demented president, a man who, by his own admission, would rather look strong than show compassion for defenseless children. Somehow, some way, we must persevere through the daily din of Trumpian noise, and make sure that the electorate never forgets the lasting pain and trauma this man inflicted on all of those children who came looking for a better life and ended up in cages.

A RAINBOW SHINES OVER CUBA’S STORM CLOUDS

A rainbow was the last thing I expected to find in Cuba. This was, after all, our hemisphere’s epicenter of evil back in the 1960s. I had to practice hiding my rotund body under a grade school desk because Cuba had Soviet missiles pointed at us. After suffering such an indignity, you’d think I’d prefer sailing to Dante’s Inferno rather than to Castro’s Cuba. Alas, Norwegian Cruise Lines has no Inferno itineraries. So, off to Havana we went.

Rainbow spruces up Havana Harbor.
(All photos by Melissa Nelson)

And there it was, this strikingly brilliant rainbow, glowing like a celestial chandelier above the Havana Harbor. There was, to be sure, no pot of gold in sight, only remnants of a broken and crumbling infrastructure in a country where time, in many ways, has stood still since 1959. Yet, this stunningly beautiful rainbow, casting its glow on a people who persevered through one existential threat after another, is a perfect metaphor for Cuba. This country shouldn’t be judged by its storm clouds alone. You have to look for the rainbow, as well.

If you want a vacation destination totally void of nuance, contradictions and complexities, a place filled with perpetual smiles, sunshine and laughter, get thee to a Disney property pronto. The Havana port of call is not for you. On the other hand, if you’ve been frustrated by knowing Cuba only through the endless dialectic of the left and right, and have longed to see it, hear it, breathe it and feel it, up close and personal, go there now, before our president completely closes the door on that opportunity.

Cuba is an island of warts and wonders, an ideological Rorschach test, designed to slot you on a scale from Che Guevara to Oliver North. Fidel Castro is dead and his brother, Raul, just retired, but the legacy of their 1959 Revolution is very much alive and on the minds of the tour guides ushering Americans through the streets of a country once considered our mortal enemy. From the windows of our tour bus, we see collapsed roofs and walls splitting apart. Window glass is missing and paint has long vanished. As we take all that in, like we were inspecting the damage of a Category 5 hurricane, our guide quickly notes the complete absence of homelessness, “thanks,” she says, “to the Revolution.”

Much of Cuba’s infrastructure is missing its 1959 sparkle.

Yes, the tour guide works for the government, the commies who inherited the Revolution. So does most everyone else in Cuba. But her spiel was far from empty spin. Based on independent fact-checking, there was far more accuracy in her three-hour presentation than in, say, a random Trump tweet. She correctly boasted that every Cuban is guaranteed quality health care at no charge, along with a free education, up to and including graduate school. She accurately noted that the Revolution eliminated illiteracy and gave everyone a place to live.

And then came a question from the back of the bus: “What’s the average income here?” The poor woman sighed, knowing that her pitch for a very beloved Cuba was about to sink into the international weeds of cultural dissonance. This, after all, was a bus tour, not a microeconomics lecture hall. Her quick answer: about $50 U.S. a month. That might be slightly exaggerated. Most sources peg it at $25 to $30. She quickly added that those amounts have very different meanings, depending on whether you live in Cuba or the U.S. That’s a tough message to get through to American vacationers who had just been charged more than a month of Cuban wages for bottled water on their cruise ship.

Only a few Cubans own cars, and they are all pre-Revolution models, most hobbled together with junkyard auto parts.

But she was right. Money means drastically different things in these two countries. The goal of Cuba’s 1959 Revolution was to dismantle private wealth in order to create a life where people’s basic needs were taken care of by the government. To this day, Cubans stand in lines daily to receive a loaf of bread and other rations. Their housing is paid for, as is their medical care and education. That means a medical doctor, a teacher and a store clerk all make about the same amount of money, and all get the same services from the government. Job selection is based on interest, skill and satisfaction, not economic opportunity.

It’s not easy for us Americans to wrap our heads around a system that devalues money. We are so accustomed to using our adjusted gross income as we did our GPA in college, as a measure of our worth and value. The American Dream is rooted in the belief of working hard in order to move up the economic ladder. That makes it tough for us to understand a place like Cuba where people are supposedly content in their subsistence, without ever having the chance to improve their lot.

Sunset on Havana Harbor.

The truth is that both these countries, despite their ideological animus, are more alike than they are unalike. Yes, one is rooted in capitalism and the other in Marxism. But both systems have produced amazing flashes of a quality life. And both have experienced dismal failures, a result of opposing operating systems running amuck. Cuba remains economically cut off from the world, struggling to survive. Yet, it manages to educate, feed and house its people, and provide them with top-notch medical care. On the other hand, dissidents are jailed without due process and there is no freedom of speech or other hallmarks of democracy.

Yet, here in the good old U.S. of A., we’re not exactly without our own warts. In fact, we just elected one as president. The great middle class has been rapidly shrinking. Some 20 percent of the nation’s wealth is owned by 1 percent of the population. The bottom half takes in only 13% of the income. Millennials are saddled with absurd amounts of college debt, even as their job market declines. Meanwhile, 32 million Americans can’t read or write and 28 million have no health insurance.

Unlike in those Soviet-inspired missile crisis days of yore, Cuba no longer poses a threat to us. Much of the economic embargo we imposed on our southern neighbors in the early 1960s, was lifted during the Obama Administration. Trump then reinstated the bulk of those sanctions. That was a severe blow to the Cuban people, with no benefit to U.S. interests. It’s time to return to that détente mediated by Pope Francis. Let’s lift those meanspirited sanctions. Somewhere over the rainbow, let there be solidarity between the people of Cuba and the United States.