Sir, – President Michael D Higgins, on the death of Fidel Castro, called that dictator “a giant among global leaders whose view was not only one of freedom for his people but for all of the oppressed and excluded peoples on the planet”. Having read the Amnesty International report on human rights in Cuba, I could not agree more with Mr Higgins’s suggestion that philosophy be introduced in schools “to discriminate between truthful language and illusory rhetoric”. – Yours, etc,
PAUL WILLIAMS,
Kilkee, Co Clare.
Sir, – While his backstory may have made it somewhat predictable that President Michael D Higgins would struggle to find the right response to the death of Fidel Castro, this controversy revives the age-old debate over the limitations of presidential office. Those who defend the right of this President to stray into political matters are blind to the unfortunate precedent that is being set for a possibly less scrupulous head of state in the near or distant future. Both the Government and Mr Higgins are being remiss in this regard. – Yours, etc,
PJ O’MEARA ,
Cahir, Co Tipperary.
Sir, – Tom Hennigan leaves no stereotype unturned in his portrayal of Cuba as a kind of gulag in the sun (“Reactions to Castro’s death reveal diverging views on human rights”, Analysis, November 29th). Cuba has a “totalitarian architecture” of “hard labour”, “arbitrary detentions”, “censorship” and “repression”. He offers us a conveyor belt of abuses in a piece devoid of perspective and a real sense of Cuba’s value to the Latin American hemisphere and wider world.
It’s a strange totalitarian state that sends 7,000 health specialists to 20 countries in response to disasters and emergencies and saves 80,000 lives. Or creates a Latin American School of the Americas to train doctors to serve the poor across the continent. It was “repressive” Cuba that broke the back of apartheid South Africa in the 1980s, and just this year helped broker the peace agreement in Colombia, ending the longest-running conflict in the continent.
Cuba has developed an unprecedented rights-based approach to development – an alternative to the unsustainable, growth-driven, neo-liberal model which so spectacularly unravelled in 2008. It is far from perfect and Fidel by his own admission made mistakes. But if a poor, developing country with an economy blockaded for more than 50 years by the US can create world-class health and education systems, free at the point of delivery, then surely that is something we should embrace and learn from. – Yours, etc,
STEPHEN McCLOSKEY,
Director,
Centre for Global Education,
University Street, Belfast.
Sir, – The eulogies to the former Cuban dictator have been justified mainly by reference to the Cuban health system, which is far superior to that of other developing countries.
Those who compare our own system unfavorably might want to address the fact that Cuban doctors are paid a pittance and cannot leave to seek their fortune in the United States or Australia once their training is completed at taxpayer expense.
While Cuba has received plaudits for sending doctors to other countries, the Cubans doctors are used as what can only be described as indentured servants. According to Cuba's state-run newspaper Granma, the Cuban government expected to make $8.2 billion from its medical workers overseas in 2015. While in Cuba, the doctors themselves are paid approximately $60 per month, while nurses make nearly $40. Overseas postings allow them to earn more; however, Cubans feel their own health system is suffering as a result of this export of workers. – Yours, etc,
PAUL KEAN,
Dublin 8.
A chara, – President Higgins has been criticised for his tribute to Fidel Castro. However, I cannot recall these same “humanitarians” being so vocal when US forces were engaged in bombing the poor citizens of Iraq or illegally kidnapping and transporting individuals (often through Irish airports it seems) or torturing the same persons in Guantánamo Bay. It seems that the humanitarianism of some politicians voicing their displeasure at our President’s comments is mediated by the flag of the oppressor. – Is mise,
R Ó BRIAIN,
Phibsborough, Dublin 7.
Sir, – Michael D Higgins’s sophomoric eulogising of former Cuban dictator Fidel Castro was not surprising. However, his pointed refusal to condemn the oppression of dissidents, artists, journalists and homosexuals was.
Mr Higgins declined to criticise these abuses, merely and pathetically noting that changes were at “the price of a restriction of civil society, which brought its critics”. He might have added that these “critics” included Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
We really do live in a post-truth society when our President is willing to overlook clear fundamental human rights abuses because the abuser practised the redistribution of wealth which Mr Higgins admires. Mr Higgins’s implicitly self-regarding comments on philosophy and fake news are quite incongruous when seen in this light. – Yours, etc,
MATTHEW GLOVER,
Lucan,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – President Michael D Higgins should have maintained a dignified silence. If he felt he must mark the death of Castro with an opinion, he should have given a more balanced and reserved view of Castro’s legacy. – Yours, etc,
AOIFE LORD,
Tankardstown, Co Meath.
Sir, – I note that from your obituary that Fidel Castro had nine children by five different women. Was this not a bit un-revolutionary, adding to his country’s housing needs? – Yours, etc,
BRIAN CULLEN,
Rathfarnham,
Dublin 16.