Talk about a short honeymoon. The one between President Barack Obama and Cuban leader Fidel Castro was over before it even got started. After praising Obama as sincere, noble and intelligent, and calling him a symbol of the American dream, now Castro is blasting him for his position on the Israeli conflict, and is demanding that the U.S. return Guantanamo to the Cuban people.

It had been years since we'd heard Castro say anything positive about any U.S. president. Not only has he made a career out of demonizing the United States, denouncing Yankee imperialism and blaming all the ills of his country on the economic embargo, but he has led the anti-American wave that has spread across much of the region.

However, Obama's rise to power seemed to have softened up the communist leader. During the campaign, Obama said he would be willing to sit with the Cuban dictator and others who have hostile relations with the U.S. He also made it clear that he's ready to take a look at ending restrictions on remittances and family travel to Cuba.

But it seems like Castro was not too thrilled to hear that while Obama announced he will shut down the military prison in Guantanamo, he also suggested that before the U.S. considers returning the 45-square-mile territory that houses the military base -- and the now-infamous enemy combatant detention center -- the Cuban government would have to make concessions.

Obama is "demanding a change" in Cuba's political regime, Castro wrote in one of his habitual editorials, a week after Obama was sworn into office. "That is a price Cuba has fought against paying for the last half-century." Maintaining the base on Cuban soil, said Castro, is "against the will of our people, violating the most fundamental principles of international law."

The U.S. presence in Guantanamo has been a point of contention since the early years of the communist regime. The U.S. has been leasing the area since 1903, after the Spanish-American War. The terms of the lease dictate that it can be broken only by mutual agreement or if the U.S. does not comply with its part of the deal. The rent remains $4,085 a year, and the U.S. has not once missed a payment. But, in refusing to legitimize the deal, the Cuban government has not cashed any of the checks sent to pay the lease. For now, the U.S. has no intention of closing the base, which provides service to the Navy and monitors its activities in the Caribbean.

The complaints and criticism by Fidel Castro are nothing new. But his latest editorial does bring up a few questions. Just a couple of weeks ago, Castro said he would suspend publication of the articles, known as his "reflections," so as to not interfere with important decisions made by the Communist Party as a new government goes into power in Washington. He wasted no time in breaking his promise.

So, this begs the question of whether Castro might be trying to sabotage -- once again -- the possibility of improving relations with the U.S. so he can continue blaming it for the island's economic woes. Others wonder if Fidel Castro, who has not been seen in public since July 2006, when he turned power over to his brother Raul, is still the one calling the shots, whether he's really the one writing the editorials and whether he's even still alive.

Obama has reached out to foreign governments, making it clear that there is a new government and a new attitude in Washington. The suspense continues regarding whether anything will change in U.S.-Cuba relations. For now, it's the same old rhetoric. The short honeymoon between Obama and Fidel is over.

Maria Elena Salinas can be reached at www.mariaesalinas.com.

(Feb. 7, 2009)