Reasons for Abolishing the Trade Embargo with Cuba Essay Example for Free

Reasons for Abolishing the Trade Embargo with Cuba Essay Cuban and U.S. relations have been on the rocks for the last 50 odd years. What follows is some background information on what has caused the rift between the two countries. It is a brief history of the American backed Batista that allowed U.S. interests to flourish in Cuba, juxtaposed against the rebel leader Castro that came afterward and the lasting effects that that has had with the relationship between Cuba and the United States and the resulting embargo that sprung from the wake. After the brief history, there is a dissection of the problems and consequences that this embargo has had on the U.S. and policy suggestion to help mitigate and repair relations. Background Cuba became an independent state in 1902. From that time until 1956, with the communist revolution, Cuba has seen countless vies for power through revolution and seen other conflicts as well. For the purposes of this paper, however, focus will remain on Fulgencio Batista, his ties with the U.S.A., and Fidel Castro after that fact. Fulgencio Batista’s rule in Cuba is a sordid one. He was first elected as President of Cuba in 1933. During this period he can be seen in a generally good light, having an efficient government that instituted such legislation as the 1940 Constitution of Cuba. He left to the United States after retiring in 1944, and from that time until 1 952 Cuba descended into corruption. He returned to power from 1952-1959, which was a bloodless coup d’à ©tat, deposing the current President in what was seen as a welcome change. This time around he would be seen as a dictator himself, revoking the Constitution and embezzling large sums of money . The United States backed Batista’s rule, and recognized him as the leader. With regards to the U.S.’s economic interests in Cuba at the time, Kennedy said this: â€Å"In a manner certain to antagonize the Cuban people, we used the influence of our Government to advance the interests of and increase the profits of the private American companies, which dominated the islands economy. At the beginning of 1959 United States companies owned about 40 percent of the Cuban sugar lands almost all the cattle ranches 90 percent of the mines and mineral concessions 80 percent of the utilities and practically all the oil industry and supplied two-thirds of Cubas imports.† This shows how heavily invested in the economy of Cuba the United States were at the time. The sheer amount of American ownership, coupled with the disparity in income between classes in Cuba, goes to show where the feelings of corruption came from, which set the stage for Fidel Castro’s revolution in 1959. Since the American backed former Cuban government had been overthrown with Fidel now in charge, it would stand to reason that the United States didn’t back the new Cuban regime, and with Fidel pushing most of the blame of Cuban problems on United State’s shoulders, he wasn’t too fond of the United States government. He nationalized all of Cuba’s industries, and started implementing a Communist regime in place of the former corrupt Capitalist system. Russia ever looking for an edge on American, during the Cold War, swooped in with aid and support, and in return asked for their allegiance, and to place Russian missile bases on Cuban soil. America not wishing to see Russian military a mere 90 miles away, stepped in to blockade Cuba, resulting in the well known â€Å"Cuban Missile Crisis†. The missile crisis resulted in a trade embargo against the Cuban nation, and more importantly against the Castro administration. This didn’t affect Cuba much at the time, as they were receiving aid from the Soviets, but after the Soviet Union fell in the 1990’s that aid stopped coming. The American embargo stayed, however, resulting in a hole, where goods normally would be, but no longer were coming. Cubans called this period in time â€Å"perà ­odo econà ³mico especial† or the special economic period . As of late, the U.S.A. has loosened the embargo a bit, allowing travel there for people with Cuban family, but Cuba remains the only country that the American government forbids its citizens to visit. Statement of Problem The embargo on Cuba is a relic of the Cold War and it’s time to put it behind us. It’s unpopular among American citizens, and detrimental to Cuban citizens. There’s a huge untapped market for American goods there that could be a nice injection into the American economy. The resulting influx money might seek to raise Cuba’s middle class, and in turn undermine Castro. The lack of a democracy and human rights violations are a valid concern, but it is hypocritical to do business with some communist regimes, and human rights violators, and not others. Russia, China, and Venezuela are all important partners in trade for the United States of America; they are also violating many human rights. We imported $34.6 billion worth of goods from Russia, $310.9 billion from China, and $28.9 billion from Venezuela all in 2011 alone . To name one instance that happened in Russia: â€Å"in June 2011 Baskhanov helped organize a small, peaceful, anti-torture rally in Grozny, the Chechen capital. Police dispersed the demonstration, detained Baskhanov and his colleague, and threatened them with reprisals if they persevered in efforts to hold police accountable.† This represents a blatant disregard of freedom to assemble, which is in the U.S.’s first amendment. China represses the internet for its people, not to mention the atrocities done to the Tibetans. It is arguably the worst modern state in regards to human rights. Venezuela is perhaps the best comparison to the situation in Cuba, however. Hugo Chavez, leader of Venezuela, is a critic of the capitalist system, and an advocate of communism. He nationalized industry similar to Castro. He puts down sedition the same way, and their violations of human rights are much the same, but yet we trade with Venezuela. The only substantive difference is that Hugo Chavez had the fortune of taking power after the fall of the Soviet Union. Since we have already set a precedence of trading with non-democratic governments, we can look to the benefit of opening up trade with Cuba. The United States is in the throes of a recession and should be constantly on the lookout for new markets for their products. A 2009 study found that doing away with all restrictions dealing with the export of agricultural goods would have resulted in a gain of $26-$74 million in dairy products alone . Plus the irony of a capitalist country selling goods to a communist country has to be worth something. Losing the embargo because you trade with other communist nations, and because you can earn lots of money might appeal to the realists out there, but it would look abhorrent to any idealists. Undercutting human rights to make a quick buck can seem pretty sleazy. For those people it is worth noting that the U.N. has voted on ending the embargo for 21 straight years , with the United States and Israel the only naysayers. Policy Recommendation In order to foster trade with Cuba it would be important to repeal all past policies that inhibit the ability for U.S. trade, which would in effect eliminate the embargo all together. To protect American interests in the area, and back at home, we would need to implement new policy that focuses on the protection of U.S. companies seeking trade with Cuba, and a repair of our relations over there. There will need to be mediation from outside sources, perhaps the U.N. could step in, that way both parties would be getting the best of possible outcome. The policies that would need to be repealed, for example, would be the Cuban Democracy Act and the Helms-Burton Act. The Cuban Democracy Act reinforced sanctions brought up from the original embargo, stating that the U.S. would continue the embargo as a way to force the adoption of democratic principles onto Cuba. This obviously hasn’t been working, as Fidel and Raul Castro have been in power since 1959. It comes off as an excuse to retain the embargo on ideological levels in light of almost no support on the global level. Both these acts reinforce the embargo and were signed in the 1990’s. They come off as a power play, in that for trade to resume between the two countries, Cuba would have to concede its current government in favor of a democratically elected one, which is pretty unrealistic as long Castro is alive. To concede the decision to the U.N. would put good faith in global politics, and would influence other countries to do the same with interstate conflicts. It would help mend the negative light that other countries look at us in, and we might be able to leverage putting such a decision in their hands for good faith in other dealings. Especially with such underwhelming support from the global community for the embargo over the past 20 years it would help us appear humble and avoid the warmongering persona many countries see us to have. To continue with the economic discussion, when Cuba nationalized all of its industry throughout the 60’s American business men that had been operating in the area lost all of the capital that they held on the island. These holdings are estimated at a worth of over $6 billion . These holdings are in the hands of American citizens, not necessarily the U.S. government. It would be wise to recoup as much of that as possible, and if the Cuban government has an interest in trading with Americans it is somewhat feasible that a recoupment would be possible, if not for that amount, at least a portion of it. If the Cubans refused that payment pressure from the U.N. could help persuade them to do so. If the U.N. deemed the acquisition of those funds superfluous, it would then be in our best interest to agree. There’s definitely an argument against them owing us that money as we owned the majority of their economy in a corrupt system, also it having happened over 50 years ago (1/5 of the time the U.S.A. has been a country, for a frame of reference). It’s obvious you can’t just change policy like this overnight, as there are some issues that need to be ironed out at levels that aren’t just about economics and trade. We retain four Cuban nationals under charges of spying, and Cuba is holding American Alan Gross. With America’s â€Å"don’t negotiate with terrorists† attitude it’s not surprising we haven’t allowed the trading of prisoners with a country that we have sanctions against but it would be in both countries interest to allow the trade. It comes off as petty to not allow Alan Gross back into the country in exchange for some Cuban nationals. By allowing the exchange of prisoners it would be a show of good faith by both countries. Conclusion Looking at the problem objectively, it can be seen that the embargo has sprung up from the United States worry at a communist regime so close to its own borders, which was justified at the time in the throes of the Cold War and the Cuban Missile Crisis. Although Cuba hasn’t been much a friend in the past, the embargo is an overall detriment for everyone involved and doesn’t even succeed at what it, in theory, sets out to do. It has no support on the national level, and even less support on the global scale. Furthermore it doesn’t make fiscal sense to exclude potential markets whilst in the middle of a recession. A policy that helps foster peace and economic gain for so little loss could easily be implemented benefitting all involved. It’s an anachronism from a time long past, and a hegemonic power such as the U.S. should never foster animosity between countries that are so close to their borders, that is what is the most prevalent danger: having such an enemy not 90 miles away from American coastlines. Works Cited Encyclopà ¦dia Britannica Online. Fulgencio Batista . http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/56027/Fulgencio-Batista (accessed December 05, 2012). Human Rights Watch. World Report 2011. 2011. http://www.hrw.org/world-report-2011/ (accessed December 5, 2012). Kennedy, John. Remarks of Senator John F. Kennedy at Democratic Dinner, Cincinnati, Ohio (October 6, 1960). Poblete, Jason. U.S. Claims Against Cuba, Buyer Beware. August 4, 2008. http://jasonpoblete.com/2008/08/04/us-claims-against-cuba-buyer-beware/ (accessed December 6, 2012). United Nations General Assembly. November 13, 2012. http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2012/ga11311.doc.htm (accessed December 05, 2012). United States Census. U.S. Trade in Goods by Country. 2011. http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/ (accessed December 05, 2012). Wood, Roberta. Senators confident on votes to lift Cuba travel ban. July 14, 2010. http://www.peoplesworld.org/senators-confident-on-votes-to-lift-cuba-travel-ban/ (accessed December 05, 2012).