COLUMN: Cuba embargo needs to end
In 1959, Fidel Castro and his band of bearded revolutionaries overthrew the U.S.-backed Batista regime. But last Tuesday, after nearly 50 years of rule, Castro quietly relinquished his power. Many Cubans had expected that he’d leave with a roar, but Castro, now 81, can scarcely summon a whimper.
Castro’s resignation marks the end of an era. He outlived 10 American presidents, and his communist government remains an anachronism of the Cold War.
His legacy is yet unknown. To many, namely the U.S. government, Castro was nothing short of a ruthless tyrant. To millions of others, though, he was a heroic visionary who defiantly stood up against the superpower next door.
Indeed, Fidel Castro was the textbook definition of a dictator. He was vindictive, stubborn, petty and paranoid. Under his reign, thousands of political opponents were executed or jailed indefinitely. E-mails are monitored and Internet use is very limited. Communism has ravaged the economy, with jobs and property subject to state control. Municipal elections lack transparency. And until recently, religious freedoms were not recognized.
On the other hand, Castro’s regime also had several achievements. As of 2001, Cuba placed a moratorium on capital punishment. Women currently hold 35 percent of the parliamentary seats in the Cuban National Assembly-double female participation in our Congress. Most notably, the Cuban government provides universal education and health care for its citizens; the former has increased literacy to 100 percent, and the latter is the envy of the developing world.
History will either absolve or (more likely) condemn Castro, but this much is certain: Now is the time to lift the embargo against Cuba and engage with its leadership through diplomacy.
The embargo made some sense through the geopolitical lens of the Cold War, but it no longer serves a purpose. Instead of undermining Castro, the embargo has only emboldened him.
The embargo became Castro’s scapegoat for the country’s economic woes. Ironically, when Castro launched his revolution, he argued that U.S. free trade policies exploited the tiny island. Once it was evident that his communistic policies were failing, though, Castro started to rail against the trade embargo, effectively shifting the blame from him to Washington.
But there is truth to the claim that the embargo has hurt and continues to hurt Cuba. The embargo withholds vital food and medicine. According to the American Association for World Health, the embargo has “severe health effects” for the Cuban people and would be a “humanitarian catastrophe” were it not for Cuba’s health care system.
Ending the embargo would be a boon to the Cuban economy. Cubans would enjoy access to cheap American goods and, American tourism would benefit Cubans who rent rooms, drive taxis, sell unique cultural goods (i.e., cigars), and operate restaurants. And as their living standards improve, Cubans will demand more of their government.
The embargo isn’t in America’s best interest either. For one, the policy is a distraction. A recent report by the Government Accountability Office found that we have more federal agents investigating Americans who are illegally traveling to Cuba than looking for Osama bin Laden.
Our economy stands to gain from lifting the embargo as well. The American Farm Bureau suggests Cuba could be a profitable export market for U.S. agricultural products. We could possibly even tap into the oil fields just off of the Cuban coast. In total, the embargo costs American firms more than $1 billion each year, according to a study by the U.S. International Trade Commission.
We must also seek to normalize relations with Cuba.
With the Soviet Union dissolved, why continue to alienate Cuba politically? We are only driving the regime further into the arms of Communist China and anti-American leftists like Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. In fact, the country we are isolating most is ourselves. The U.S. embargo against Cuba been has roundly criticized by the international community.
Raul Castro, Fidel’s brother who has assumed the presidency, is someone with whom the U.S. can negotiate. Raul’s government will not be an extension of Castro’s revolution. Experts believe Raul will, instead, preside over a slow transition from communism to democracy in Cuba.
Unlike his ideologically driven brother, Raul is a more pragmatic leader and a modest reformer. While head of the armed forces, he opened the economy to foreign tourism, the U.S. dollar and to some private enterprises. These perestroika-like changes are being coupled with an increased political openness.
Already, as president, Raul has sponsored town hall meetings across Cuba in which people are able to freely voice their economic concerns. Moreover, Raul has also expressed interest in normalizing relations.
Because we have an historic opportunity in Castro’s resignation, I hope our politicians return the favor.