Just as the ruthless regime of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro declared that it was gasping for its last breath of air last week, Sen. Barack Obama shamefully was sending oxygen to Havana.

In his most recent debate with Sen. Hillary Clinton, only two days after Castro announced his resignation, Obama said that as president of the United States, he would be willing to meet with Castro's successor "without preconditions."

Everyone already knew that Castro would be replaced by his equally authoritarian brother, Raul, and Obama should have known that this was not the time to legitimize the continuation of a 49-year dictatorship.

Yet that's exactly what he did! By acknowledging that he would not expect to see concessions before meeting the new Cuban dictator, Obama demonstrated he is "dangerously naive," according to Sen. John McCain, who took advantage of Obama's outrageous position to score some points among anti-communist Republicans, especially Cuban-Americans in southern Florida.

Even Sen. Clinton, who is clearly a leftist on many issues, explained that before she met with a Cuban dictator, she would expect to see some movement toward democracy. "I would not meet with him until there was evidence that change was happening," Clinton said.

But Obama said he needs no such evidence as a precondition for a meeting — no free elections, no release of political prisoners, no free press, no freedom to travel even within Cuba, no movement toward democracy. All he needs is "preparation" to set an agenda for his discussion with our enemies in Havana — as if the Castro tyrants, after a half-century of crimes against humanity, could be swayed easily to release their suffocating grip on the Cuban people or to open their closed society in ways that would lead to their demise from power.

"Dangerously naive" is an understatement.

Immediately after the one-party Cuban parliament "elected" Raul to replace the ailing Fidel on Sunday, the new dictator assured all his henchmen that he will consult with his brother on all major issues.

So what has changed? Nada! Most U.S.

scholars on Cuba agree that nothing will change in Cuba as long as Fidel is alive. The scholars think that once Fidel is dead, Raul only will be willing to release his grip on the Cuban economy, not on the Cuban people. A Cuba in the image of China, where the government has freed the economy but not the people — that's all Obama would be able to get out of Raul Castro.

And that's unacceptable for Cuba, just as it should be for China. We should not be trading partners with our devout ideological enemies, especially those who would use our dollars to oppress their own people.

But instead of letting the Castros and their henchmen choke, so that the Cuban people finally can breathe free, instead of at least waiting for a sign that Cuba will stop hosting terrorists and sponsoring terrorism, at the debate, Obama already was sending oxygen to the Castro brothers by offering to lift some U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba as "a show of good faith." He doesn't get it! The "show of good faith" should come from Cuba!

In sharp contrast to Obama's position, McCain said that although he hopes Fidel Castro will have "the opportunity to meet Karl Marx very soon," he believes that "Raul is worse in many respects than Fidel was."

Referring to Obama, McCain said that to "meet, talk and hope may be a sound approach in a state legislature, but it is dangerously naive in international diplomacy, where the oppressed look to America for hope, and adversaries wish us ill."

Clinton continued citing Cuba this week, as she went on a new offensive to showcase Obama's inexperience in foreign policy: "We simply cannot legitimize rogue regimes or weaken American prestige by impulsively agreeing to presidential-level talks that have no preconditions," Clinton said Monday. "It may sound good, but it doesn't meet the real-world test of foreign policy."

Yet Obama apparently thinks fancy rhetoric will solve all his problems — even with communist dictators who hate the United States. Quoting John F. Kennedy in the debate, Obama noted: "We should never negotiate out of fear, but never fear to negotiate."

Perhaps what we should fear is that the person we elect to be president is too naive to negotiate.

To find out more about Miguel Perez and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2008 CREATORS SYNDICATE INC.