The Sad Politics Of Elian
The dysfunctional tug-of-war playing out between the U.S. and Cuba over the fate of Elian Gonzalez is reminiscent of the mechanics that plague broken American families.
Dad won't speak to Mom, Mom won't speak to Dad, and the kids get caught in the middle.
All over the world - not just in America - this scenario presumably plays out millions of times each day.
Usually, though, it plays out behind closed doors.
In this case, however, there is no Mom. Elian's mother, Elisabeth Brotons, is dead - she perished trying to bring her son here - and somehow two countries, complete with a dysfunctional relationship of their own, have adopted the role usually played by warring parents. Besides opening this case up to virtually unlimited media scrutiny, this eventuality also thrust the matter into the histrionic arena of American campaign politics.
To be sure, the families themselves are using the boy as an international prize to be won or lost. There is, at this juncture, no way around the conclusion that the boy's best interests are secondary to the politics of the moment.
It must be said that the historic lack of communication between the U.S. and Cuba, inexcusable though it may be given our post-Cold War world and the 90-mile proximity between the two lands, has helped fuel widespread interest in this matter. From a political perspective, the thought seems to be that, somehow, this could end up being a catalyst for change in Cuba.
For his part, Elian - barely past babyhood - is caught in a snare.
The boy's fate, whatever it may be, is now in the hands of politicians - always dangerous for a small child - and so we turn our focus to their engagements, conducted against the backdrop of America's dubious post-Cold War policy of ignoring Cuba's existence, and ask whether this matter could ultimately make a difference in the upcoming November elections.
As a starting caveat, this much is clear: If the federal government somehow manages to resolve the case quickly, getting the boy back to his father and avoiding violence in Miami or elsewhere, this matter will have faded away almost completely by November.
However, if people get hurt - an anti-Castro zealot in Miami or, much worse still, Elian himself - then the politics of Elian stand a chance of becoming a defining issue.
For Al Gore, whose public soul-searching on this matter has popped up in recent campaign stops, it's not too late to come out with some intellectual justification for his highly publicized break with the Clinton administration, which says a ruling ordering the boy to be reunited with his father should be respected.
Gore, perhaps seeking votes from voters of Cuban heritage in Florida (a state which he has little chance of winning anyway), said at the beginning of April that the boy ought to remain in the U.S. until the matter has been exhausted - in family court.
The firestorm that created seems to have led Gore to the beliethat, if he avoids the press long enough, he can avoid putting his foot in his mouth a second time. But with publications like the Hotline now counting the days since the vice president last talked to reporters - and lampooning him accordingly - Gore's silent Spring may end up costing him too.
Perhaps Gore could say something like, "You know, this is a tough issue and, like many people, I am of two minds. While I hate the thought of anyone growing up in Cuba under Castro, I believe a father has a basic right to hold his son."
For Bush, who ironically has done less waffling on the issue and seems to come down squarely in the "keep him here" camp, it's possible the Texas governor could end up being vulnerable to family values attacks. To wit: Why would a man who professes to put family first be so interested in cleaving this particular family in two? Despite that, Bush, by virtue of his greater silence, is less exposed to the matter than Gore.
Other notable politicians, such as the GOP-controlled Congress (by and large) and President Clinton, have treated the Elian case like an investor eyeing the shaky Nasdaq: limiting exposure and waiting for better days.
Because the fate of Elian is subject to complex, cogent arguments from each side, political candidates who acknowledge this first, and hold off on black-and-white judgments, will in the final analysis survive best in the eyes of the common-sense oriented American voter. Millions of these voters, it should be said, come from broken families of their own and would no doubt look unfavorably on a politician perceived as insensitive to Elian's fate.
The best hope for politicians of all stripes is that this matter gets resolved quickly and peacefully. That way, there won't be any backlash either way. Because a boy's life is at stake, and millions of people are watching, political fallout in the wake of this matter is something no politician wants.
Moreover, a quick resolution would be best for the boy himself, not that that's what we're talking about here. Elian's personal fate seems to have become an ancillary issue.