Moisés Naím / El País

Raúl Castro and Otmar Issing could not be more different. The first is a Cuban soldier and the second a European economist. Castro is one of the founding fathers of the communist regime in Cuba and Issing is one of the fathers of the euro. While Castro was fighting to export the Cuban revolution, Issing was working for Europe’s integration and is one of the architects of the European monetary system. Castro is about to turn 80 years old and Issing is 75. I don’t know if they know each other, or if they have ever spoken, but I doubt it.

Although they have nothing in common, both surprised the world recently with strident declarations about the imminent failure of the different projects to which they dedicated their lives. The surprise does not end there. Even greater is that aside from the immense differences between Cuba and Europe, both prescribe the same medicine to prevent the collapse of their respective projects.

“We either change or, as we have already run out of time to continue on the edge of the cliff, we sink,” said Castro in an important speech at the end of last year. At about the same time, Issing wrote, “My conclusion at the beginning of 2011 is bleak. We haven’t yet reached the moment of truth for the European Monetary System. It has only been postponed.” According to him, if the European countries do not make profound changes, the euro will not survive.

And, as we know, the failure of the euro would strike a devastating blow to the European integration process. Issing’s article had a dramatic impact because of his credentials. He is a former board member of both the Central Bank of Germany and the European Central Bank, where he also served as its chief economist. Issing stressed that financial transfers from what he calls “disciplined countries,” to those that are not, create political tensions that threaten the future of the European Union. He stated that a model in which the countries live (and spend) beyond their means is unsustainable and doomed to failure.

The Cuban president arrived at this same conclusion. In a recent speech he announced that as of 2011, “structural and conceptual changes will be introduced in the Cuban economic model.” And Castro has very clear ideas about what that means: cut government spending; reduce subsidies; make the labor market more flexible; reduce the number of government employees; increase productivity, output, and exports; reduce restrictions on economic activity; and promote foreign investment. Issing could not agree more. In fact, he recommends the same for Europe.

They also agree that these reforms are politically difficult and will encounter much opposition. Anticipating resistance, Castro was straightforward about the fate of those who oppose his changes: any official who “is not convinced of our governmental program should resign,” he said. He also made an urgent call to “change the mentality of the Cuban people and leadership to the new economic scenarios to come.”

Castro used examples to illustrate the need for changes: “the Vietnamese people asked us to teach them to grow coffee, and we went there; we taught them, they used our experience. Today Vietnam is the second largest coffee exporter in the world. And a Vietnamese official told his Cuban counterpart: ‘How is it possible that you taught us to grow coffee, and now you are buying our coffee?’” I don’t know how the Cuban official answered. I’m sure that he said: “the embargo.” To hear Castro ridiculing the use of the embargo as an excuse to justify Cuban economic failure is, to say the least, ironic. It is also highly ironic to hear him claim that the reforms he is promoting do not undermine the validity of the regime’s ideology. “The measures we are implementing are designed to preserve socialism, strengthen it, and make it truly irrevocable,” he stated.

Recently, Raúl’s brother, Fidel Castro, wrote: “[In Cuba] we have never chosen illegality, lies, demagoguery, deception of the people, simulation, hypocrisy, opportunism, bribery, total lack of ethics, abuse of power, crime, or revolting torture.” This statement is as credible as that of Raúl when he claimed that his reforms did not mean any real ideological change in Cuba.

In any case, it might be productive if Castro spoke to Issing. After all, Raúl seems to have more in common with him than with his brother Fidel.