“Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from
his master unto thee: He shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that
place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best:
thou shalt not oppress him.”
–Deuteronomy 23:15-16
Why did the Clinton administration change its position on how the Elian
Gonzalez case should be handled?
On Dec. 1, 1999, the position of the Immigration and Naturalization
Service
was as follows: “Although INS has no role in the family custody decision
process, we have discussed the case with state of Florida officials who have
confirmed the issue of legal custody must be decided by its state court.”
Just six days later, however, the INS’ position, in conjunction with
other
administration agencies, changed 180 degrees.
The State Department reported Dec. 7: “The INS will be in contact with
Mr.
(Juan Miguel) Gonzalez in the near future to explain the process by which it
will evaluate his rights in this case.”
What transpired between Dec.1 and Dec 7?
Cuba’s Fidel Castro orchestrated a series of rallies demanding Elian’s
return and issued threats of reprisals if his demands were not met. That’s
it. That’s all that happened. There were no other significant developments
in the case. Nada. El zippo. Zilcho.
In other words, for political reasons, Clinton administration officials
changed their minds — big time. They didn’t explain why. They just did it
—
a total flip-flop. They made a custody decision without hearing any
evidence, without going through the normal adjudication process.
What does that sound like to you?
To me it strongly suggests that the White House is making a decision
about
young Elian’s fate based on its own, strange, undebated and unannounced
foreign policy goals. What might they be? I strongly suspect they
involve normalization of relations with Fidel Castro’s Cuba.
Now, is normalization of relations with Cuba necessarily a bad thing? I’m
not sure. But, to me, that’s a debate for another day. And it should have
nothing to do with what is right for Elian Gonzalez. It’s a separate issue
entirely.
However, the strong-armed tactics of Fidel Castro in the Elian Gonzalez
case
ought to give Americans real pause to consider whether normalizing relations
with this two-bit tyrant is the right thing to do.
It should be no surprise that Clinton would want normalized relations
with
Cuba to be part of his political legacy. This is the guy, remember, who sold
out whatever integrity the U.S. political system retained to his good
buddies in Beijing — another bunch of brutal Communist oligarchs. To
Clinton, the question is not why we should restore relations with Cuba, but
why not? Is Fidel any more detestable than Jiang Zemin and the gang? Is Cuba
any worse than North Korea, another hostile hellhole with which the Clinton
administration has played footsie? Vietnam? It was draft evader Clinton who
proudly normalized relations with Hanoi.
If that’s what the American people want, so be it. If it were up to me,
I’d
probably argue against treating any of these nations with dignity as long as
they enslave their own people and, in some cases, threaten their neighbors
and, ultimately, U.S. security.
But that debate should take place far apart from the debate over the best
interests of an innocent little child whose life has already been severely
traumatized because of repression he and his family members continue to
endure in Cuba.
All Elian’s caregivers in Miami ask and expect is a full hearing on the
facts. Why is it that the Clinton administration is so unwilling to allow
the evidence to be examined impartially by people experienced in dealing
with such matters?
Hijacking this custody case to the federal level stinks. It is another
example of the executive branch grasping for power it does not enjoy under
the Constitution. It is another example of the way the Clinton
administration uses people — exploits them shamefully — to achieve its
political objectives.
No matter what you think personally about the fate of Elian Gonzales,
where
he belongs and with whom, every thinking person should agree that he
deserves a full hearing on the facts of the case. What harm could that do?
Why should Janet Reno have the final say? Would you trust the Clinton
administration to make the right decision about your kid?
The fix is in. Clinton is stepping all over Elian Gonzalez in a bid to
build
a political legacy that will overshadow Monica Lewinsky. In the process,
he’s doing the same thing to young Elian and our nation’s principles that he
did to Monica.