Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
President Obama's Chance to Change Course on Cuba
Although lifting the embargo -or recognizing the Cuban regime- requires congressional approval, President Obama, with the Democratic
majority in Congress should move that motion forward, even taking into account recalcitrant members of Congress who would try to oppose
it.
Remarkably, the embargo has benefited no one except its target: Fidel Castro. It has allowed both Fidel and Raul Castro to maintain a strong grip on power, to use it as a rallying point against the United States, and as a scapegoat for the deprivations Cubans have endured since the embargo was imposed in 1962.
The efforts of those supporting the embargo -mostly in the Cuban exile community in Florida- as a way to undermine the Castros' regime have proven to be counterproductive, since they have not weakened their power nor turned the population against them. In addition, the
changing demographics has made the younger generation less obsessed with the regime and more open to negotiation.
As a result of the embargo, and for several years, there were severe restrictions in the export of medicines from the US to Cuba. In 1995, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States informed the U.S. Government that such activities were a violation of international law, and requested that the U.S. take immediate actions to exempt medicines from the embargo. According to the Cuban delegation to the U.N. the restrictions on medical products were "so extensive that they make such imports practically impossible."
In spite of these difficulties, Cuba has one of the best public health care systems in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Kaiser Family
Foundation, a U.S. non governmental organization that evaluated Cuba's health care system in 2000-2001, described Cuba as "a shining example of the power of public health to transform the health of an entire country by a commitment to prevention and by careful management of its medical resources."
The embargo has been roundly condemned worldwide through several United Nations General Assembly annual votes. In the 2008 vote the
motion to keep the embargo was defeated by 185 against three: US, Israel and Palau, a Pacific Island of 21,000 people. George P. Schultz, who was Reagan's Secretary of State, has called the continuous U.S. embargo "insane."
As things stand now it is improbable that the US embargo will hurt Raul more than it hurt Fidel. Now is the perfect time to try a diplomatic approach that could lead to lifting the embargo and establishing normal relations between both countries. The process should consist of several steps to allow the development of trust, trade and lead to the free movement of people between the U.S. and Cuba.
So far, those who stand to lose the most in this situation have been ordinary Cubans, who enjoy good health care and education but none of
the advantages of living in an open society with access to goods that people in other countries take for granted.
All Cubans I spoke to on the island are eager for normal relations with the U.S. They feel emotionally closer to the Americans than they were to the Russians at the time they were receiving considerable help from the Russian government. One Cuban told me, half jokingly, "The
Cuban regime will be more easily defeated by iPods and jeans than by an American army."
Lifting the embargo on Cuba is a much less complex endeavor than ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan or solving what is rapidly
becoming the Pakistani nightmare. Ending this measure would create an atmosphere of goodwill worldwide of unpredictable, but certainly good consequences for world peace. Persisting in a course of action that has been proven to be wrong for almost half a century is to accept the tyranny of failed ideas.
39 Comments so far
Show AllThe Cuban Embargo is a gigantic Shame that we've had to put up with for 46 years. Embargos do not historically work well and this one has certainly been another failure. It has only served to punish poor people. It's way past time to be done with it!
Our policy towards Cuba just shows how petty we can be. Using Castro as an excuse makes no sense: we've never let dictators get in the way of our support before. As dictators go, Castro is Santa Clause. It seems to me the real reason is the political clout of a bunch of exiled Cuban capitalists living in Miami. We could learn a lot from Cuba. It's time to stop this madness. Both countries would benefit enormously.
This is the esaiest call of all. Normalize relations with the very small island of Cuba and treat them like the neighbor they are. Its absurd to treat them like a threat.
Notwithstanding our revolutionary fathers' failed attempts to conquer Canada in the late 18th century, Cuba was the first of the 'imperial' possessions desired by leaders of the newly minted American government. Jefferson and Adams both wanted it and historically we've coveted it and done everything we could to prevent it from ever having its independence.
Since the Castro boys tossed out Batista, Cuba has presented at least two major problems to 'US owner/operator' interests. The first is that our corporate friends no longer had access to the easy resources Cuba possessed and Batista's dictatorship, friendly to those US interests, guaranteed. The second is that removing itself (under Castro) from its delegated role in the 'grand design' that US planners had placed it pursuant to their vision of how the world should be run after World War II amounted, from their point of view, to a 'bad example' for other Latin American nations.
Years of illegal economic sabotage, assassination attempts against El Presidente Castro (whatever you think of his personality or policies), and an ill-advised and unilateral embargo against the Cuban people is a cruel and irrational policy that both the democrats and the republicans have long supported. It is meant to punish them for thumbing their noses at the US and to deliver a stark message to other independent-minded nations in Latin America - do what we say or you'll get the same.
Yes!
Sioux Rose
TIRE BITER: Sound analysis, however, as we see happening in South America, the oil profits that Venezuela enjoys are being used as a basis for loaning money to its neighbors so that South American nations can grow independently without the purse strings or unfair trade rules enforced by the WTO or World Bank. In other words, they ARE thriving on their own, as has Cuba in spite of so many setbacks. And on THAT note, do we not notice that our resource-profligate lifestyles in AMerica (*using 25% of the world's fossil fuels) have had a direct impact on global climate change to the tune of Cuba having THREE hurricanes hit it this year alone? That is such an unfair toll for a people to pay for their ecologically reprobate, arrogant northern neighbors.
Exactly.
Obama understands that the embargo cannot be lifted until freedom and democracy have been brought to Cuba. Why support a dictatorship?
Sometimes we have to compromise. After all, we do need to buy oil from dictatorships like Saudi Arabia or Venezuela. But we don't need anything from Cuba, so why not stand up for democracy?
The U.S. has never stood up for democracy in Latin America or the Caribbean. They want dictators who will do their bidding like the Batista regime that Castro's revolution overthrew.
Ha! But Castro was a dictator! Democracy does not exist in Cuba (or Venezuela or Bolivia or Ecuador).
And sure, maybe under Bush or Reagan the US didn't care about democracy in Latin America or the Caribbean. But we did under JFK and Carter. And we will under Obama!
Bolivia , Venezuala and Ecuador are all democracies. Indeed they are more democratic then is the United States.
PK
Thats getting a little too far out. And patently untrue. Watch it unfold over the next year.
They are democracies held hostage by leaders with no respect for democracy. As Thomas Friedman has pointed out Venezuela and Russia are "petrol dictatorships".
I greatly agree. I was in Bolivia last month, and everyone was very open with me talking about their government. Most in favor, a few not. There was a political rally in Plaza Murrillo, La Paz on 10/21 after hundreds of thousands of people including Evo Morales, marched across the country to build up support for the new constitution they are voting on next Jan. You can read all about it in my blog,
Alaska Progressive Review, www.akprogressive.blogspot.com
OMG Joe Plumber.
So America is the greatest democracy in the world is it?
With a choice of only two parties, both beholden to the
corporate money and to Israel. And with the media, an
essential plank in any democracy also controlled by
corporate money and by Israel.
It's Joe Pumbar.
You have no idea the H-E-double-hockey-sticks I've gone through since that "Joe the Plumber" idiot showed up. What am I supposed to do? Get a name change?
My point isn't that we're better than everyone else (although I am proud to be an American, aren't you?) it's that we should be supporting democracies not dictatorships. Why is that so controversial? Yes we only have two major parties, but you are ignoring that we also have primaries, which is the heart of our democracy. Just look at the range of opinions on the Democratic party from Kucinich to Lieberman. It's not like everyone in the same party thinks the same way. It's just a way to make our democracy more efficient. Or would you rather be like Italy with hundreds of political parties creating a democratic gridlock? Personally, I think the fact that we just elected Obama shows that our elections are fair and our democracy is healthy.
The reason that Cuba has undergone failed invasions, had its ports
mined, had sweeping sanctions against it, has embargoes on travel to it,
and (most importantly) is continuously demonised, is that Cuba is a threat.
Not a threat to the common man, mind you. It poses a threat to the rich
- the threat of a good example. If Cuba was allowed to thrive, which it
is currently not, it would demonstrate the standard of living that is
possible when wealth is distributed, instead of being kept to the rich.
Even now, despite being a tiny nation downtrodden by its neighbor, the
empire, it manages to feed, educate, and supply medicine adequately. I
would be quite proud of that, if I were a Cuban.
Yes, that you have a change of government every now and again is a good
thing. Without a democracy, everything hinges on whether the leader is
good. I think Fidel is a great man, but Mao was a lunatic.
In the case of western democracies, an election usually brings about a
change of facade rather than substance. Those who do not please those
who pull the strings will not be allowed to get elected in. The media
is controlled by the money. You know quite well that Kucinich was
marginalised. He was not really given a chance.
Most importantly, it stable. It gives the illusion of people power, and
prevents revolutions. We shall see in a year or so whether electing
Obama changes much. I dont think those who own the media and the
politicians are going to let Obama change too much, even if he wanted to.
Mind you, that has never stopped the US from supporting dictators
(remember your old friend Saddam? Remeber Pinochet?). And it has never
stopped them from demonsing overthrowing democracies either (remeber
Aristide, remeber Allende). That is not the reason that the US
interferes. When it is convenient, the Taleban or others are heroic
"freedom fighters", and later, when it is convenient, they are
scapegoated as terrorists, or yes, as "dictators". Those praised are
obedient client states. Those demonized are those who seek
independence, yes - freedom - from the USA.
I am not an american, and seeing the continuous mindless flag waving
that northern americans do, and germans did under the democratically elected
hitler, does not come over not as a virtue, but as arrogance.
I dont hold in high esteem any democracy where all the
politicians are owned by the elite, or by another country,
but even within those limitations, a multi party democracy
provides a choice to the voters, whereas a two party
democracy offers not much chance at all.
A multi party system is inherently more democratic.
Sioux Rose
Solid analysis.
"our democracy is healthy"
The one with the most money wins! That spells a very "healthy," Darwinian system for humans to live under.
There is a difference between 'supporting a dictatorship', (which was, by the way what we did before the Castros succeeded in removing Batista, and what we did in Iran, Chile, Bolivia, Argentina, Haiti, Columbia, Iraq, Indonesia, South Korea, South Vietnam - the list goes on) and irrationally punishing a people because the government is resistant to US-government desires. If supporting dictatorships were actually out of bounds in American foreign policy our history would look very different. The first principle of any system of ethics is that what is good, or bad, for us is good, or bad for everybody else. The best test for ethical behavior is to reverse the roles and see if you can still support the action. If we as a nation act in the world without some functional ethical framework then we're no better than other maurading pirates and cannot claim, simply because of 'American exceptionalism', special dispensation and a better end.
What alien planet have you just escaped? The US has relations with Burma, China, Rwanda, the Congo, Ghana, Nigeria, Liberia, Indonesia, and many other countries that either are now or have been dictatorships.
The quality of neocon trolls is really slipping.
Poet
Does the US have more willing troops to "bring democracy" to Cuba? And if they do, will that mean education and health care will plummet to US levels?
This article is spot on. There is no reason to continue the embargo. If we can do business with China---the same China that killed thousands of pro-democracy protesters less than 20 years ago---we can do business with Cuba. They pose no threat to us, and it's clear the present policy is a total failure.
The Cuba embargo is the height of American hypocrisy AND brutality. We maintain this embargo because "they hate our freedom?" Is that why Americans who DO travel to Cuba are imprisoned? NOT, BTW, by the Cubans. We inflict every kind of pressure the demonic little minds in the CIA and NSA and White House can think of, because it is a failed system? Then why hasn't it failed, despite American pressure, pressure that brought down many South and Central American democratic leftist governments, the USSR, and even China?
I've traveled just a bit, and I know that at least a few other nations feel much freer than the US, and probably ARE. I don't blame the Cubans, I blame America, which thinks it owns every small and large nation it can bully. And it DOES bully them, brutally and relentlessly, to service American Capitalism. If they refuse to cooperate, i.e. become client states, or if they set up a leftist government, which favors People over Capitalism, they become targets, EVEN IF those governments wer5e democratically elected.
Castro did wonders for the Cuban People. Before Castro, some 85-90% of Cubans lived in poverty. Now that is almost none. The same goes for education, medical care, clothing, food and shelter. Where there was want before, every Cuban now has need answered. No, they are hardly rich, but no one starves, and on the average, every Cuban is FAR better off. Life might be much better for Cubans if America would learn that every other nation does not exist to provide cheap raw materials, labor and markets for American Capitalism. Cuban Socialism might be much more successful without hostile American political and economic pressure, which, of course, is the whole point. There must be no successful anti-Capitalist societies! That must change if we are ever to have justice in the world.
So will Obama correct the double standards against Haitian immigrants in Florida? After all, Cubans are given "legal" status even if they enter the country illegally and yet Haitians are harassed and tormented and deported back immediately even if they do come legally.
So will Obama correct the double standards against Haitian immigrants in Florida? After all, Cubans are given "legal" status even if they enter the country illegally and yet Haitians are harassed and tormented and deported back immediately even if they do come legally.
Cuba does not need US medicines. Everyone knows this. Chelala and the rest who call for lifting the blockade are looking for business opportunities. They want to push US style production upon Cuba for personal profit at the expense of the Cuban people. Everyone knows this.
For all the love some of you are bestowing upon Mr. Castro, let me remind you that there is more to life than medicine and education. The hopelessness and lack of personal freedom on the island serve to undermine whatever gains in basic services the revolution has fostered. He is most certainly not a "great man", and the fallout which will follow his demise will involve a great deal of bloodshed. As for the embargo, don't discount the role of the US sugar and tourism industries, which have strongly opposed any efforts at normalization between the 2 countries due to the inevitable loss of revenue they will suffer from the competition.
Nonsense. You've never been anywhere near Latin America or you would know that Castro is THE icon here.
WHAT fallout after his demise?
Your thinking is way off base.
I'm born and raised in Cuba, so you're assumption is as ridiculous as your comments. My thinking is clear and rational, whereas you're simply deluded and uninformed. That Fidel is an icon among many Latinos is irrelevant. You know less about Cuba than you think you do, moon. Is there an "r" missing from your screen name? It goes between the 2 "o"s.
I don't claim to know everything there is to know about Cuba--like YOU apparently do.
But I do have more than 15 years living, working and traveling in Latin America--so I know more about this region than just about anybody else posting here.
Fidel's being an icon among folks who very much need icons is absolutely NOT irrelevant.
YOU and your infantile insults are what are irrelevant.
Take your sandbox mentality someplace else.
The subject is Cuba, about which you obviously know nothing, in spite of your arrogance. You know nothing about anyone else's experience, yet you claim to know more about the Latin American region than anyone else here. That makes you knowledgable about Cuba in what way? I DO know about Cuba, and what those folks need is not an icon, but rather a way to rise out of poverty and hopelessness. They need leadership. Pretty much the same thing people in South and Central America need. Your idolization of Fidel is to be expected from someone who knows nothing about living in a repressive society. Fortunately, outside of Cuba and other repressive states, even morons like you can go online and write about things they know nothing about with impunity.
There are several problems with your repy personally attacking me and calling me a moron:
1. You were not raised in Cuba, but in Maimi. Cubans are not native English speakers.
2. You are on here trolling as part of the Maimi Mafia.
3. I put my experience and my longtime knowledge of the region up against yours any day. I am not paid to give conferences about Latin America--including a recent one on the history of Cuba's agrarian reform--because I am a moron.
Piss off.