There have been other moments of police violence against Black men captured on video over the past few years.

As part of a new moment in human history when nearly everyone is equipped with video-recording phones, witnesses – and sometimes even the mandated clip-on cameras of police officers themselves – have captured the violent deaths of men such as Eric Garner, Philando Castile, Rayshard Brooks.    

“Say their names” became a rallying cry, and such videos, especially, helped launch Black Lives Matter, organized and led by a younger generation of Black Americans, who demanded the nation address its history of racial injustice with mass protests not seen since the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s.

The name George Floyd, however, resonated globally, and from the start there appeared to be something different about the impact of the 9 1/2 minutes of footage that captured his murder at the corner of 38th and Chicago in Minneapolis.

“Just a human, just a man, lying on the pavement being pressed upon, desperately crying out,” said prosecution team member Steve Schleicher in his final arguments Monday. “A grown man, crying out for his mother. A human being.”

On Tuesday, a jury issued a verdict all too rare in American history, convicting former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin on all counts, including murder.

But as the Monitor reported Tuesday, despite the honking car horns and shouts of solidarity outside the Hennepin County Courthouse, the mood could not be considered happy.

“The exhaustion is real, the constant emotional turmoil we experience is real,” says JaNaé Bates, communications director of Isaiah, a St. Paul-based network of faith organizations that promotes racial justice in Minnesota. “And the idea that the only off-ramp for that is a conviction – it’s incredibly frustrating, because we know the problems go far beyond one cop.”

Ann Hermes/Staff

Protesters comfort each other outside the Hennepin County Government Center as a guilty verdict is announced in Derek Chauvin's trial on April 20, 2021, in Minneapolis.

A year ago the shocking footage of Mr. Floyd’s murder sent a jolt through white America. With millions at home and more attuned, his death sparked a number of unprecedented if modest initial responses. 

The controversies over athletes taking a knee began to wane, the NFL admitted it was wrong to oppose players like Colin Kaepernick, and athletes in leagues overseas began to say Mr. Floyd’s name and take a knee.  

Brands began to acknowledge and remove the racist stereotypes implicit in their packaging, more organizations began to remove memorials to Confederate leaders, and companies like Twitter and Square began to make Juneteenth a paid holiday. Merriam-Webster agreed to include a definition of systemic oppression in its entry on “racism,” and news organizations, including The Christian Science Monitor, began to capitalize Black – an acknowledgment of the sui generis experiences of Black Americans throughout the nation’s history.

Even President Donald Trump, who long emphasized law and order, responded by signing an executive order last June, calling for police departments to train officers on de-escalation techniques and use of force standards – which “will be as high and as strong as there is on earth,” the former president said.

Yet many Black Americans temper such glimmers of hope after Tuesday’s verdict with a more sober assessment, noting that centuries of systematic oppression will not just easily disappear. 

“We can’t reconcile the tension that exists between police and Black communities unless we speak truth about the extent of that violence – deadly violence directed at Black communities, and what that looks like in historical perspective,” says Hasan Kwame Jeffries, professor of history at Ohio State University. “This verdict defies history because historically, it’s rare that police get indicted and it’s even rarer that they get convicted.”

Law enforcement officers kill an average of 1,000 people a year. About 1% of those officers face charges afterward. Since 2005, just seven police officers have been convicted of murder, according to Philip Stinson, a Bowling Green State University professor.

The massive protest movement and the shocking video indeed helped make a difference after Mr. Floyd’s murder, Professor Jeffries says. “But one of the things that was a big difference, and that we need to take away from this, is we saw what happens when prosecutors actually want to prosecute police.”

Maryland revokes police bill of rights

Police officers and prosecutors work closely together in the justice system – many have referred to it as an intimate fraternity between those within the constant stress of some of the most high-stakes jobs, and most prosecutors hesitate to aggressively go after their own, experts say. Police officers, too, are granted additional protections, like qualified immunity and other legal shields from prosecution. 

In 1974, Maryland was the first of some 20 states, including Minnesota, to enact a bill of rights for law enforcement officials, which added extra protections for police officers accused of misconduct, including limits on the length of time in which citizens could allege complaints, limits on the discipline handed down to officers who violate procedures, and a requirement that only other police officers could investigate those accused.

But this month Maryland became the first to repeal these special protections, its legislature overriding the veto of Republican Gov. Larry Hogan.

It was indeed the murder of Mr. Floyd that propelled these changes, says Lawrence Grandpre, director of research for Leaders of a Beautiful Struggle, a grassroots organization in Baltimore. People went from “awareness to truly desiring or demanding some sort of change.” 

But the repeal “doesn’t fit the neat mythology of, we rose up, we protested, and now we have achieved victory,” Mr. Grandpre says. “What happened in Maryland is a decadelong organizing effort that’s culminated in meaningful, but not revolutionary progress.”

Lee-Ann Stephens, an educator in St. Louis Park, a suburb of Minneapolis, also expresses an ambivalent mixture of relief and hope, tempered with a certain amount of realism. 

“I cried. I cried. I felt like I’ve been holding my breath for almost a year,” Ms. Stephens says. “I cried from relief, recognizing this is a milestone, but it’s not the finish line, and there’s still so much more work to be done. But this is a great start to the work that needs to continue.”

When Mr. Chauvin’s trial began March 29, polls suggested that fewer white Americans, not more, expressed support for the goals of the Black Lives Matter movement. 

About 43% of white respondents said they supported the movement last year after images of Mr. Floyd shocked the nation. But a year later, only 37% expressed support – the same number measured before Mr. Floyd died under Mr. Chauvin’s knee, the polling company Civiqs found.

Ann Hermes/Staff

From left, Nicole Solis and Corelle Nakamura hold hands outside the Hennepin County Government Center as they wait for the verdict in Derek Chauvin's trial on April 20, 2021, in Minneapolis.

More significantly, perhaps, white opposition to Black Lives Matter significantly increased over the same time, jumping from 35% last year to 49% at the start of Mr. Chauvin’s trial.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who has the highest-rated show in cable news, suggested on Tuesday that Mr. Chauvin’s trial was hardly fair, and that the “unanimous and unequivocal verdict” was really a result of fear. 

“Everyone understood perfectly well the consequences of an acquittal in this case. After nearly a year of burning and looting ... by BLM, that was never in doubt,” Mr. Carlson said during his broadcast Tuesday, in which he cut off an interview with a former sheriff’s deputy who said the verdict was just and characterized Mr. Chauvin’s actions as “savagery.”

But there have been signs of change in the concrete steps being taken by corporations, the media, and a number of state and local governments – like supporting reparations and reinvesting in community resources, many activists say.

“The practice of how law enforcement deals with folks of color, those are the things that are on trial more,” says Nathan Hampton, a principal in the Minneapolis public school system. “I think what happened with Mr. Floyd and his death kick-started a lot of changes, and I hope these changes continue to work and serve people in the community.”

In Houston’s Third Ward

The day after Mr. Chauvin’s conviction, in Mr. Floyd’s childhood neighborhood in Houston’s Third Ward, residents gather by the handful to pay their respects at a mural of Mr. Floyd painted on Scott Food Store’s back wall. A Black Lives Matter flag hangs to its left. Flowers adorn the cracked concrete underneath it. Old-school soul music plays from speakers across the street. 

Dennis Roundtree, senior pastor at Acts Tabernacle Holiness Temple, slowly walks up to the mural of Mr. Floyd’s face. He stares at the painting, as if to lock eyes. He and Mr. Floyd both went to nearby Yates High School. They didn’t know each other back then, but they grew up only a few classes apart. 

Dr. Roundtree thinks Mr. Floyd’s death didn’t just affect his community in the Third Ward. It changed the nation forever going forward. 

“I think George Floyd will go down in history like Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, and it goes on,” Dr. Roundtree says.

Shirley Gilliam, an educator at the Houston Independent School District, and Candra Handy, who also works at HISD, say it’s their first time seeing the memorial. With each step, they say they could feel their emotions rising up.

She thinks Mr. Chauvin’s conviction on all three counts signifies that their community’s pleas have been heard.  

“It has brought such awareness to Black life. When you take one of our own ...” Ms. Gilliam pauses and collects herself. 

As an educator and mother, she understands the tragedy of Mr. Floyd’s death ripples beyond Mr. Floyd’s family and, ultimately, the nation’s collective grief. Ms. Gilliam says she can’t help but feel compassion for Mr. Chauvin’s family. “There are two families that have been destroyed by this – and over what? Over not being human? Over ...” Her voice trails off again. 

Now, she thinks Mr. Chauvin’s conviction will cause officers to think twice and act with compassion for others in the future.

“Now, they’re going to care,” she says. “They’re going to care and they’re going to think about it.” 

“The whole country listening”

Other activists point to the need to continue the unprecedented momentum of the past year.

“We got the whole country listening to us right now,” says Brian Fullman, lead organizer of Barbershops and Black Congregation Cooperative, a coalition of beauticians, barbers, and faith leaders in Minnesota. “This isn’t the time to slow down our work. This is the time to expand.”  

“I have not organized my community around the Chauvin trial, but around systemic oppression and abuse and the culture of policing across the country,” Mr. Fullman says. “We know those things will continue, and so if you don’t line up and get involved, the protesting is for nothing. You have to get to the inside and have a plan.”

State Rep. John Thompson, a Democrat whose district includes part of St. Paul, echoed those sentiments, saying the verdict was an important step rather than a final destination in the march for racial equality.

“This is definitely a victory, but there’s still a lot of work to do,” says Mr. Thompson, who became involved in politics after a police officer fatally shot his friend Philando Castile in a St. Paul suburb five years ago. He, too, has introduced a bill that would end special protections for police officers charged with civil violations or violent crimes.

“This fight has been going on since before I was born, back to the days of Martin Luther King Jr., and before him,” Mr. Thompson says. “So as long as I got breath in my body, I’m going to fight.”

The scene was all too familiar – a police officer on trial for violence against a Black American. But in this case the outcome was exceptional, as a jury found former Minneapolis officer Derek Chauvin guilty of three counts, including second-degree murder, in a rare rebuke of law enforcement treatment of people of color.

Across the country, millions of people found that, in the words of George Floyd’s family, they could breathe again. The case involving Mr. Floyd, who died as Mr. Chauvin knelt on his neck, would not end like that of the 1991 beating of Rodney King, in which Los Angeles officers were acquitted or escaped charges. It would not end like the 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin, with a Florida neighborhood watch member acquitted on grounds of self-defense. It would not end like the 2014 killing of Michael Brown by a Ferguson, Missouri, police officer, with a prosecutor declining to bring charges.

But the outcome of this one case doesn’t necessarily point to a sea change in U.S. jurisprudence, say experts on the interaction between police and minority groups. The Chauvin case was an outlier – with a graphic, lengthy video of the incident, and prosecution testimony from emotional bystanders and the defendant’s fellow officers.

And the outcome of a legal proceeding is not necessarily the same as the delivery of justice. A trial weighs a specific incident. It does not delve into what happened in the months and years before those actions, the surrounding culture, or deeper moral implications – even if certain cases seem to take on the weight of those broader societal issues.

“Our community conceptions, our lay conceptions of justice don’t actually match up terribly well with law,” says Monica Bell, a professor of law and sociology at Yale University. 

The conditions that led to the nine minutes and 29 seconds of Mr. Chauvin kneeling on Mr. Floyd still exist in other communities, says Professor Bell, and will continue to exist if citizens don’t act. 

“Let’s think about the work we have to do so that we don’t have to have these types of trials ever again,” she says.

Uncommon to bring charges

There have been many instances of law enforcement using extreme force against minority suspects in recent years that have roiled the nation and outraged some citizens. Very few of these incidents have resulted in convictions of the officers involved.

To begin with, it is uncommon for prosecutors even to bring charges in those circumstances. The shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson is a case in point: A grand jury declined to indict the officer involved, Darren Wilson. Two St. Louis prosecutors considered whether to charge Mr. Wilson. Both decided against it. 

Susan Walsh/AP/File

Michael Brown Sr. and Lesley McSpadden, the parents of Michael Brown, are shown giving an interview in Washington on Sept. 27, 2014. Both federal and state prosecutors determined there was not enough evidence to bring charges against the police officer who fatally shot Mr. Brown, who was 18 and unarmed, in 2014. Mr. Brown's parents later settled a civil suit against the city of Ferguson, the police chief, and the officer who shot their son.

“Can we prove beyond a doubt that a crime occurred?” said Wesley Bell, the top prosecutor in St. Louis County, when announcing his decision in July 2020, six years after the shooting. “The answer to that is no.”

Lack of definitive evidence can be an impediment at trial. George Zimmerman – not a police officer but a community watch volunteer – described his tussle with Mr. Martin as a life-and-death struggle. He was initially not charged, as police said there was no evidence to rebut his self-defense argument. Tried in 2013, Mr. Zimmerman was acquitted of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges.

Juries can be sympathetic to the way police frame violent encounters even if some evidence presents another side to the story. The severe beating that Los Angeles police officers gave Rodney King following a speeding stop in 1991 was among the first such cases recorded on video by a bystander. At trial the four officers said they were alarmed by Mr. King’s “bizarre” behavior and his refusal to lie down as requested. The defense analyzed the tape blow by blow, slowing it down and robbing it of shock value. All four officers were acquitted of assault.

Mark J. Terrill/Ap/File

Los Angeles police Sgt. Stacey Koon listens to Deputy District Attorney Alan Yochelson, after demonstrating how fellow officer Laurence Powell used a baton on Rodney King in Simi Valley, Calif., March 20, 1993. Mr. Koon was one of four LAPD officers ultimately acquitted in the assault of Mr. King.

In that context, the guilty verdict in the Chauvin case is unusual. The primary reason Mr. Chauvin was convicted may have been the extraordinary video of his encounter with Mr. Floyd, which provided an unfiltered view of what the then-officer did, and how calm he seemed as he did it.

“That’s one thing that’s very different between this case [and the case of Mr. Zimmerman], where you had only the word of Zimmerman, which put the jury in a box, and which to a great degree foreordained the outcome,” says Robert Spitzer, a political scientist at the State University of New York at Cortland.

Breaking the “blue wall” of silence

Other officers testified that Mr. Chauvin’s use of force was excessive, and medical testimony named him as the cause of Mr. Floyd’s death. The video also viscerally demonstrated the sheer length of time involved, more than nine minutes.

It’s important to remember that the legal standard in such cases is that jurors envision they are an officer on the scene, having to make an instant assessment about whether to use force, says Professor Spitzer. Mr. Chauvin’s actions extended far beyond that time frame. On the video, he did not even appear stressed. 

That’s in contrast with a case earlier this month in which, during a traffic stop near Minneapolis, a police officer fatally shot a suspect, Daunte Wright, who had lurched back into his car. Body camera footage showed the officer shouting “Taser!” repeatedly before shooting Mr. Wright, and police officials said she mistook her gun for a Taser. She has now been charged with second-degree manslaughter. 

When tensions are high and people are making split-second decisions, even professionals can make mistakes, says Professor Spitzer.

“When you boil these down on a case-by-case basis, there are lots of factors at work, which all complicates the relationship between an individual case and individual facts versus what seems to be happening nationwide,” he says.

How individual cases add up

Still, it’s possible for those individual cases to add up and eventually affect the country at large, says Brandon Terry, a professor of African American studies at Harvard University. He’s cautiously optimistic that the way the nation talks and thinks about police use of violence is changing.

Joe Burbank/Orlando Sentinel/AP/File

George Zimmerman (right) is shown at the conclusion of at his trial in Sanford, Florida, on July 13, 2013. Mr. Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch member, was acquitted in the 2012 shooting of Trayvon Martin on the grounds of self-defense.

“It’s a really vibrant part of American culture, which is a litigious culture, to treat trials as moments of civic reflection,” Professor Terry says.

For instance, looking back to 1992, it’s not hard to see a more careful discourse on the subject in 2021. Back then, the media and public referred to the “Rodney King” trial, even though it was police officers, not Mr. King, who were the defendants. Today, it’s the “Derek Chauvin” trial, since he was the one charged – not the “George Floyd” trial.

There have been cracks in the “blue wall” of police silence, with many law enforcement officers testifying. That’s a big change even if it is intended to paint Mr. Chauvin as an outsider and head off more sweeping reforms, Professor Terry says. And some states are moving on reform bills in any case – Maryland this month passed legislation to limit police officer use of force and restrict no-knock warrants.

“People are connecting the Chauvin trial much more tightly to a demand for democratic accountability in policing and ... they have much more sophisticated visions about what that would look like,” he says.

Progress on what Professor Terry calls “procedural justice” – rules that govern institutions – is not the same as progress on the deeper moral questions of substantive justice.

Julie Fletcher/AP/File

Protesters hold up signs in a rally for slain Florida teenager Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida, on March 31, 2012. The case prompted nationwide discussions about racial profiling, with President Barack Obama expressing sympathy for Mr. Martin's family.

But think of all the young people who mobilized in the biggest social movement in American history last year, he says, in part because they are ashamed of what happened to Mr. Floyd, and because they think their society can be better than it is.

“Do I think [the verdict] will stop police brutality? Absolutely not. But movements need victories,” says Professor Terry.

It remains to be seen how far this conviction can push voters, politicians, and police departments to start rethinking policing in a way that will prevent deaths such as Mr. Floyd’s from happening in the first place, adds Colorado University law professor Aya Gruber, who has studied leniency standards toward those who kill minorities.

It is a statement on American society that it takes a nine-minute video that horrified much of the rest of the world to get a police brutality conviction, Ms. Gruber says.

“Seeing this as the finishing line is totally premature,” she says. “This is the starting line.”

Florence Lo/Reuters

A giant screen in Beijing shows news footage of Chinese leader Xi Jinping attending a video summit on climate change with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron, April 16, 2021.

President Joe Biden brought a China policy to the White House based on three C’s: compete, confront when necessary, and cooperate when it’s possible and even vital to both countries’ interests.

Now the “cooperate” element of the policy toward America’s principal global rival is about to be put to the test by two more C’s: climate change.

On Thursday, Earth Day, President Biden will open a two-day global summit where he’ll proclaim America’s return to a leadership role on climate change and at which he wants greenhouse gas emitters – of which China is by far the largest – to make new, game-changing carbon-reduction commitments.

But winning China’s cooperation with the United States on climate-related issues, even as the U.S. pursues an increasingly confrontational relationship on many other geopolitical priorities, is unlikely to come easily, many China experts say.

Moreover, some add, China will almost certainly consider its cooperation on climate as a bargaining chip for U.S. concessions on competition and confrontation, and another C: criticism.

“The Chinese are already doing things on climate change for their own advantages, but it’s a separate thing when it comes to cooperating with the United States,” says Derek Scissors, an expert in U.S.-China relations and Chinese global investment and trade policy at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) in Washington.

“They’re not going to significantly cooperate with the U.S. on reducing their coal dependence and coal emissions, for example, when at the same time the U.S. is accusing them of grave human rights violations in Xinjiang Province and IP theft,” he adds. “It’s costly for them to cooperate, so they are going to seek to offset those costs with things they want from the U.S. somewhere else.”

In the run-up to the climate summit, the Biden administration has been busy courting China by inviting Chinese leader Xi Jinping and pressing the Chinese to unveil new concrete steps to improve on their existing international commitments.

Indeed, Mr. Xi on Wednesday confirmed his attendance at the virtual summit, with Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin saying the Chinese leader’s acceptance reflected the country’s willingness to cooperate with the U.S. on the basis of mutual respect.

An existential threat

On the surface, U.S.-China cooperation on climate might seem to be carrying the day. Last week White House special climate envoy John Kerry had three days of conversations in China, at the conclusion of which the two powers agreed to work together to address what both sides agree is an existential threat.

We “are committed to cooperating with each other and with other countries to tackle the climate crisis, which must be addressed with the seriousness and urgency that it demands,” the world’s two biggest carbon emitters said in a statement issued Saturday.

Moreover, the U.S. and China have already committed to working together in some international arenas. For example, the two powers co-chair the working group on sustainable finance at the G-20 forum of the world’s major economies.

U.S. Embassy Seoul/AP

The U.S. special envoy for climate, John Kerry, at a round table meeting with reporters in Seoul, South Korea, April 18, 2021. During two days of talks in Shanghai in advance of the virtual summit on Earth Day, Mr. Kerry and his Chinese counterpart Xie Zhenhua agreed that the U.S. and China would cooperate on climate change.

On Monday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken gave a pre-summit speech in which he laid out both the daunting challenges and the significant opportunities – including job creation, innovation, and development of a sustainable and more equitable economy – in addressing the climate crisis.

With his backdrop the Chesapeake Bay – which he called “the crown jewel of the world’s estuaries,” all of which he said face grave threats from climate change – Mr. Blinken said that in reasserting its global climate role, the U.S. would not hesitate to criticize countries that aren’t stepping up.

And he had another warning: “Climate is not a trading card; it is our future.”

China-Europe cooperation

Yet as good as that may sound as rhetoric, AEI’s Mr. Scissors says he’s not sure he believes it.

“If the problem of climate change is really, really important to us, as the Biden administration says it is, and if you really think the Chinese need to do more to address this serious global risk, then the U.S. is going to have to put some things on the table,” he says.

Noting that China accounts for almost half of global coal production and continues to add new coal-fired energy plants, Mr. Scissors adds that China knows its action on climate “is worth a lot” to the world, including the U.S. “Anyone who thinks the Chinese are going to trade all that away for free is not dealing in reality,” he says.

Still, there are also experts who note on the other hand that China is the global leader in green technologies – production of solar panels and electric vehicles, for example – and has deep and strengthening ties to the European Union and European countries on climate-related issues like trade.

“If you look at cooperation, China is already working very closely with the Europeans,” says Sanjay Patnaik, director of the Brookings Institution’s Center on Regulation and Markets in Washington. Citing a policy tool that Beijing unveiled last month, he adds that “China is already the largest carbon market in the world, in close cooperation with the Europeans.”

Mirroring a European Union model, China’s ambitious carbon market aims to reduce greenhouse gases by capping carbon emissions and then allowing carbon emitters like coal-fired plants to trade their allotted allowances.

On the other hand, Mr. Patnaik says President Biden could have a hard time “cooperating” with China and other major carbon emitters while it remains unclear just what U.S. climate policy is or how much cooperation the Biden administration will get from Congress to implement bold climate measures.

“Biden is in a bind. He’s telling the world America is back,” Mr. Patnaik says, “but what does that mean?”

U.S. policy adjustments

Indeed, others say the U.S. certainly has the potential to play a significant leadership role on the climate issue, including with China – but that it will take getting its own climate house in order to then act from a position of strength.

At the summit Mr. Biden reportedly is planning to announce that the U.S. is setting an ambitious new goal of cutting its emissions almost in half by 2030.

“As the U.S. steps up, it can put more pressure on others such a China and India,” says Amar Bhattacharya, a senior fellow at Brookings’ Center for Sustainable Development. He then foresees a shift in the U.S. approach “to the opportunities” presented by climate action, “including the opportunities for cooperative action.”

Still, even some Chinese experts bluntly present the potential for cooperation with the U.S. on climate in the very “trading card” context Secretary Blinken suggests the U.S. will not accept.

“China maintains an open attitude when it comes to climate cooperation and welcomes dialogue,” Zhang Monan, senior fellow at the U.S.-Europe Institute at the China Center for International Economic Exchanges, said in a Bloomberg interview this week. “However, if countries continue to pressure China or adopt confrontational and non-cooperative tactics,” she added, “then China will address this with corresponding actions.”

AEI’s Mr. Scissors says the Biden administration is consistently using tough rhetoric with China, but by and large has not yet “committed themselves to taking the truly costly actions on China.” And he says China is using the moment to “message” the U.S. that by acting on its hardened rhetoric, it’s going to prompt consequences in other areas of U.S. interest.

“What I see,” he says, “is the Chinese are thinking: ‘Maybe we can push [the U.S.] away from some of the stuff we really don’t like – and then maybe we can be cooperative on climate.’”

For the first time in more than 60 years, there is no Castro at the helm of Cuba’s communist government. Raúl Castro stepped down on April 19, though observers suspect he will remain the most influential person on the island. But that doesn’t mean Cuba hasn’t changed since the 1959 revolution that lifted Mr. Castro and his late brother Fidel to power. From an opening economy to wider internet access, the island has slowly seen significant changes to human rights and freedoms.

Why is Mr. Castro stepping down?

The move was expected: Mr. Castro pledged in 2018 to step down as head of Cuba’s Communist Party this year. Announcing his retirement last week, dressed in his iconic olive fatigues, he said he’s “fulfilled his mission and [is] confident in the future of the fatherland.” He will be replaced by President Miguel Díaz-Canel, who succeeded him as president in 2018 and represents a younger generation of Castro loyalists. Mr. Castro isn’t the only member of the old guard retiring this year: A handful of big-name leaders of his generation will also be stepping aside.

Mr. Castro carried the torch of the Castro name and the imagery of Cuba’s revolution, but he also pushed the communist state to adapt to a new reality during his time at the helm, agreeing to talks with the Obama administration that ushered in (short-lived) changes in Cuba’s relationship with the United States.

In his speech, he gave a nod to his impending role behind the scenes, even without a formal title: “As long as I live I will be ready with my foot in the stirrup to defend the homeland, the revolution, and socialism with more force than ever.”

What does this mean for Cuba?

This leadership change is happening amid one of the worst economic crises in decades. Cuba’s economy shrank by 11% last year, amid the pandemic, currency reforms, and restrictions enacted by the Trump administration. All of this combined hit hard the sources of income lots of Cubans – and the government – depend on, like tourism and remittances. But many hope some chains will come off with Mr. Castro’s departure, which might make long-needed economic reforms easier to push through the one-party system.

“This should clear the way for stepping up the pace on economic reform,” says William LeoGrande, a Cuba expert at American University.

Without their predecessors’ revolutionary bona fides, Communist leaders of the new generation are expected to be more beholden to the demands of the population to validate their leadership. This won’t mean a reversal of the centralized, communist system – in fact the theme of this year’s Communist Party meeting was “continuity.” But it could lead to loosened restrictions on private business or breaking into long-held government monopolies. The government has already opened up sales of beef and dairy products to parties other than the state.

What is life like in Cuba today?

Some observers are calling the economic situation in Cuba – rife with long food lines and shortages – the worst since the so-called special period that followed the fall of the Soviet Union. Although things are bad, the environment in Cuba is completely different than it was in the 1990s, says Dr. LeoGrande.

“I think the political perils the government faces are probably higher because of the changed circumstances: Cuban society is more heterogenous than it was then … inequality is more visible today,” he says. “And then, of course, there’s the internet.”

If the past several years serve as an example, Cuba can expect to see and hear more from its citizens and dissidents itching for change. Late last year the government came under historic pressure from artists and activists, who took to the streets after videos of police detaining protesters were caught on cellphones and shared widely online. Increased internet access has allowed activists to raise awareness around everything from violence against women and freedom of expression to animal rights.

Of course, access to regular internet is still pricey, limiting who can tap into the tool. And freedoms of expression and gathering – although less stringent than several decades ago – are still limited on paper and in practice, with the government continuing to crack down on those who speak out against it. 

Reuters

A resident in Minneapolis takes a selfie in front of a mural of George Floyd after the verdict in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin.

Many Americans, especially those of African descent, have long looked to the justice system for affirmation that the ideal of equal treatment before the law extended to them. That affirmation came in part with the April 20 conviction of a former Minneapolis police officer for the killing of a Black man. Yet any joy on that point has been muted by calls to see justice in all its different aspects, from retribution to mercy.

A good example was the reaction of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison. “Since the investigation and prosecution of this case began last May, everyone involved has pursued one goal: justice,” he said. “I would not call today’s verdict justice, however, because justice implies true restoration. But it is accountability.”

Besides the kind of justice that restores – or heals – relationships between people, civil rights veteran the Rev. Al Sharpton suggested after the verdict that justice should even extend to preventing such police killings: “We don’t find pleasure in this. We don’t celebrate a man going to jail.”

These comments reflect a country digging deeper than ever for the values-laden underpinnings of an often-marred American system of justice.

The trial itself reflected this public desire for greater understanding of justice. For one, it was televised, a rarity in Minnesota. The jury was very racially mixed and worked quickly together to reach a verdict. And two top Minneapolis police officers spoke against the excessive use of force by Derek Chauvin, breaking the “blue wall of silence” that often hides police abuse.

Mr. Chauvin himself showed no remorse, although his sentencing in about eight weeks will provide an opportunity for the family and friends of his victim, George Floyd, to speak directly to him. Perhaps then another aspect of justice might emerge – the potential to offer healing components beyond the punitive if Mr. Chauvin acknowledges his crime and its impact, accepts the grief and any forgiveness offered by the Floyd family. Rebuilding the broken bonds in our society is the more daunting task, but the most needed.

Since the killing last May, much of U.S. society has moved toward a consensus on ways to prevent police brutality. State legislatures have introduced more than 1,000 police reform bills and resolutions. More than 200 cities and towns now have citizen advisory boards to monitor police conduct. A federal police reform bill in Mr. Floyd’s name passed the House and awaits action in the Senate. U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland has launched a civil investigation into the constitutionality of the use of force by the Minneapolis Police Department.

To fulfill the promise of justice for all, said Vice President Kamala Harris after the verdict, is “not just a Black America problem or a people-of-color problem. It is a problem for every American. ... And it is holding our nation back from realizing our full potential.”

On many levels, this trial set a high standard for future cases of police abuse. Its more useful lesson is that justice is more than a fair verdict of guilt and a deserved prison sentence. Along the way, less punitive aspects of justice are not only possible but also necessary.