Despite all the hysteria and controversy surrounding Elian Gonzalez, most Americans are inclined to believe that it all boils down to a simple right of custody, that his best interests lie with his father--not his great uncle, Lazaro, or his cousin and proclaimed surrogate mother Marisleysis. This argument might be pertinent, if the boy were staying in the United States. But what exactly does it mean for Elian to go home with his father to Cuba?

According to Castro, the first order of business will be to put Elian in a "reorientation" camp to purge him of the capitalist and democratic elements he was exposed to in the U.S. He will be taught to view his mother as a traitor for trying to abduct him to the United States. He will be paraded around as a Communist icon, as Castro has already made him into the largest existing piece of anti-American propaganda in the country. As an adolescent, Elian will be forced to leave his family to provide labor for the Communist State. Yet, the bottom line here is that it is not in the best interests of Elian to return to Cuba, even if he is with his own father. In Cuba, Elian does not belong to his father--he belongs to the government as a ward of the Communist state.

How can the U.S. Government presume that it knows what is in the best interests of Elian? Has Janet Reno ever lived under the yoke of a communist dictatorship? Let's ask ourselves this: who knows more about what life is really like in Cuba--Janet Reno or the Cuban-Americans who fled Castro's regime to look for a better life in America?

It might be impossible to dissociate political motives from this issue, but if any party is to remain true to the best interests of the boy it should be the Cuban-American community. The particular experiences of Cuban-American exiles afford them a special insight into the matter. Yes, the exiles resent Fidel Castro, but they are not blinded by their hatred. Instead, they are keenly aware of what awaits Elian in Cuba. The passions that have been stirred in Miami are rooted in the exiles' conviction that the boy should not endure the sufferings from which they have fled. Thousands of Cubans choose to risk their lives every year as they attempt to traverse the Florida Straits on makeshift rafts. Indeed, many hundreds die on their journeys towards freedom, including Elian's mother who paid the highest price--her life--for her son's liberty.

Despite these good intentions, one might argue that Cuban-Americans wish to deny the reunification of father and son for solely political reasons. But let us be perfectly clear: Our contention is not to keep Elian from his father. We believe Juan Miguel Gonzalez is a good man and we do not doubt his love for Elian. But perhaps, in this case, the father may not be fit to decide the best interests of his son: Juan Miguel is the product of a communist regime. Who knows what kind of strongholds Castro may have over the father--what relatives of Juan Miguel's will be in danger if he seeks political asylum in the U.S. Can we know for certain if he speaks his own mind, if he actually desires to return to Cuba? Certainly not.

Given all the uncertainties and the different angles presented, the best solution is to allow an impartial family court to decide the best interests of the boy. In the Los Angeles Times, Frankfurter Professor of Law Alan Dershowitz explained that there is precedent for a six-year-old child to receive individual legal representation in a court of law. We firmly believe that Elian deserves his day in court.

Finally, the question of the raid is one that also elicits much division of opinion. Many consider the operation a great success. We agree that the relatives were being evasive in their negotiations with Reno. But in our minds, the Gestapo-like tactics employed by Reno were absolutely unnecessary. Such tactics are reminiscent of the Castro government. Reno did not extinguish all her options: she should have obtained a court order that would have held the relatives criminally negligent if they did not return Elian. The negotiators for the family were nearing an agreement that morning with Reno at the exact moment the raid was executed. Quite simply, there was no need to have an automatic weapon in the presence of six year-old child that has been already been through so much suffering, and it is no wonder the Cuban-American community is outraged. The media has repeatedly shown the same images of civil disobedience, but the 800,000 Cuban-Americans in Miami cannot be held accountable for the unruly actions of a handful of juveniles. To simply categorize the exile community as raucous is a gross misperception.

As for President Clinton, is it a coincidence that renewals for the immigration accords with Cuba are rapidly approaching? Is it possible that what he really fears is a repeat of the Mariel Boatlift of 1980, when approximately 125,000 Cubans fled the island? And is it a coincidence that Gregory Craig, the lawyer who "volunteered" to defend the father, was the former personal attorney for Clinton as well?