Council on Foreign Relations: Manners Over Life?

Mark Falcoff, of respected and distinguished service to America, wrote to Powerline blog today about a dinner he attended with Fidel Castro in 2001, as part of a delegation from the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations. Falcoff’s intent is to reflect “how Castro's ego and indifference to the fate of others has impacted upon an entire people.”

Instead, or moreso, Falcoff reflects badly upon himself, David Rockefeller, Pete Peterson, and the other notables from CFR there.

About half-way into a long, long toast by Castro, over 30-minutes, that they were standing for, one of the delegation’s members seated next to Falcoff slumped into his chair:

About ten minutes, maybe fifteen, into the Maximum Leader's speech, Bill Rogers slumped down into his chair, obviously ill. Everybody in the room except Castro stared at him, but nobody moved. Another five minutes Bill passed out. He wasn't on the floor but he wasn't sitting up either. At that point Ricardo Alarcon, the president of Castro's puppet parliament, came racing around from the other end of the table, and asked me what was going on. I said I didn't know; Bill was obviously sick or worse.

Castro--who couldn't have been ten feet away--was completely oblivious to all this, delivering his platitudes to a corner between the wall and the ceiling. Alarcon looked at Rogers; then he looked at Castro. He decided on the spot nothing must interrupt the Comandante. So we all stood there for--it seemed like an eternity--until Castro finished. When he finally did end and we could raise our glasses, I felt a huge sigh of relief. Now Castro could be told to attend to Bill's health. But no, he wandered off into a corner, still talking, until some woman pointed to Rogers.

Then and only then did Castro clap his hands, bodyguards went into action, doctors were produced, and Bill was carried out to some place where he could be given an EKG. Fortunately it was nothing more than heat exhaustion. But he could have died right there and nothing could have been done about it.

It has always seemed to me that this incident is entirely emblematic of Castro's unnatural self-absorption. In this case it was only Bill Rogers' fate in the balance; think of how Castro's ego and indifference to the fate of others has impacted upon an entire people.

There’s no mention by Falcoff of why he or the other American luminaries didn’t have the common decency to assist Mr. Rogers or to dare interrupt Castro.

It’s, also, not clear that Castro was unaware of his trusted underling already rushing to Mr. Rogers, or that part of his underling’s not interrupting his toast may have come from the silence of the Americans there perhaps seeming less than fully concerned. After his toast, once Castro was explicitly made aware, he did immediately cause help to come to Mr. Rogers. Falcoff’s reflection is less than convincing on this score against Castro.

The purpose in my writing this is not to excuse Castro, for this or anything else, but to raise a bigger issue.

It is worthy of mention that Falcoff and other stalwart dignitaries of American capitalism let a colleague sit, possibly dying in his chair, while their priority is not to interrupt Castro's long-winded toast.

To me, it displays a widespread moral turpitude among American politicians and businessmen re: dealings with tyrants.

Indeed, as Goethe observed, manners are a reflection of one’s soul. I’d add that manners carried to the extreme of endangering lives are a reflection of false priorities. Including treasuring trade profits that entrench despotic regimes or talk-fests with ogres that only feed the egos in the room but serve no useful diplomacy.

For a sanity check on my take, I solicited several others’ takes. Winfield Myers’s take is typical:

The question I'd have is obvious to any child: why did they just stand there with glasses raised in the face of this fellow's obvious medical emergency? What did they have to fear--would Castro have dared to shackle them or have them roughed up had they had the temerity to attend to Rogers? Who cares about being rude, so-called, in the face of the possible death of a friend?

I emailed to Mark Falcoff this morning:

I, and others, are shocked that -- surely facing no physical risk yourselves -- you and other paragons of American business and commentary stood by, literally, as a colleague sat slumped in his chair, as you say possibly dying, in order not to interrupt Fidel's harangue.

Before I comment publicly, would you please comment as to why, or if anything significant to this point is missing from your post.

Thank you, in advance, for your reply, as soon as possible please.

If and when I do get a reply from Mark Falcoff, I will add it to this post.

While waiting, John McCain’s priorities are not confused, or diplomatically overridden by Emily Post. Today he said of Fidel, “"I hope he has the opportunity to meet Karl Marx very soon.” Reuters adds, “McCain, 71, a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, has accused Cubans of participating in the torture of some of his fellow prisoners in Hanoi during the Vietnam War.” My friend Mike Benge, a fellow POW of McCain’s, testified to Congress in 1999 about the Cuban torturers and interrogators, and more.

While Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are looking forward to meeting with Fidel’s brother-inheritor of the scepter, McCain is again clear:

"Apparently he is trying to groom his brother Raul," McCain said. "Raul is worse in many respects than Fidel was."

Many of our diplomats, businessmen and commentators need to get the morality and priority of their manners straight. Then, at least, our enemies will be more cognizant of who and how they toast, or torture.