On February 2, 1962, President John Kennedy called his press secretary, Pierre Salinger, into his office and instructed him immediately to find and purchase one thousand of his favorite Cuban cigars: H. Upmann Petit Coronas. A perplexed Salinger spent the better part of that night scoping out smoke shops and buying up as many of the Caribbean delights as he could find. When Salinger reported back to the president the next morning, he presented him with almost 1200 H. Upmann Petit Coronas. After joyfully inspecting the lot, Kennedy opened his desk drawer and immediately signed Presidential Proclamation 3447, outlawing all American trade with Cuba. As is the custom with most politicians, after securing his stash the president made it instantly illegal for other Americans to enjoy Cuban-made cigars.
Such was the birth of one of the biggest failures in U.S. foreign policy – the Cuban trade embargo. It was meant to bring the downfall of Fidel Castro and his communist revolution, but 47 years and two communist dictators later, it still hasn’t accomplished its goal, and there is no indication it ever will.
Then this week, actually for the first time ever, there appeared to be cracks in Washington’s resolve to perpetuate this charade. The Obama Administration announced that it would be easing parts of the embargo against Cuba, namely restrictions on travel and money transfers by Cuban Americans to family in the island nation. Almost immediately, Republican Congressman Mario Diaz-Balart issued a statement calling Obama’s action “a serious mistake.” Quoting the congressman’s sentiments further, he stressed the importance of U.S. policy to continue
to insist upon the three fundamental goals for Cuba enshrined in U.S. law which have long constituted a bipartisan U.S. Policy of State: The liberation of all political prisoners, the legalization of all political parties, independent labor unions and the press, and the scheduling of free, internationally supervised elections.
All this bluster because the president is simply allowing Cuban Americans to resume normal relations with their kin in Cuba? After all, administration officials have indicated that they are keeping the rest of the embargo intact to provide “leverage” against Cuba to free all political prisoners. It is the opinion of this writer that the president should be commended for his humanitarian act on behalf of Cubans in America and Cuba. However, it is also my hope that this is just a first step in the process of normalizing relations between ourselves and Havana.
It is time for the trade embargo to be lifted in its entirety once and for all. With all due respect to Congressman Diaz-Balart our policy towards Cuba should be based on logic and not emotion. Yes, the Castros and their cronies are bad people, but our shortsighted policy has unfortunately not delivered the knockout punch we desired. In fact, generally speaking, economic embargoes do not produce the results we crave. The recent examples are several: Burma, Zimbabwe, North Korea, and Iraq. In North Korea and Zimbabwe, sanctions contributed to mass starvation and disease outbreaks for the local population while not affecting the dictator at all. In Iraq, a decade-long embargo against Saddam did not instigate the masses of Iraqis to rise up against him; it simply made them more poor and allowed him to strengthen his hold over that society.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Baronius
You can't count China as a win for free trade. They've made economic reforms that have enabled them to increase exports, but their political oppression remains. You also omitted the perfect example of outside pressure bringing down a criminal government, South Africa. I think that free trade is beneficial in nearly every situation, but I fear that the improved relations with Cuba will look like capitulation, especially given Obama's recent apologies and deferential attitude. I don't believe that Obama's actions will help to end the oppression in Cuba.
2 - Clavos
I don't believe that Obama's actions will help to end the oppression in Cuba.
Bingo!
3 - roger nowosielski
Even if not, all American administrations prior have done jack shit.
4 - Ma ® k
US policy of waging economic warfare on civilian populations through sanctions must be ended. Petition your town council.
5 - Clavos
If Obama wants to end the oppression in Cuba, he should have the Castro brothers assassinated.
Until they're gone, the oppression in Cuba will remain.
6 - pablo
Uhhhh isn't that unlawful Clavos?
7 - Clavos
Yes, it is, Pablo, but I don't think that will bother the Obama team.
8 - roger nowosielski
Well, they'll die of natural causes, anytime soon.
9 - Dr Dreadful
South Africa, Baronius? Seriously? The one example of success in a monotonous history of failure to overthrow oppressive regimes through economic and diplomatic sanctions?
The reason South Africa worked was because of something that never happens: almost complete international unity in opposition to apartheid. And it still took almost 50 years.
10 - roger nowosielski
And I guess that what it must take in each and every case - nothing less.
11 - Cindy
And then it only took the US 15 years to take Nelson Mandela off the terrorist list. Since the apartheid government labeled him a terrorist so did the US .
12 - roger nowosielski
It is fucked up. And we're supposed to be the leaders of the "free world."
13 - Cannonshop
There's a very simple reason NOT to lift the sanctions-Cuba is a Communist Nation, yes? one that claims to work-how well would it work with the corrupting influence of American Money-men?
I submit to you all, that Cuba should remain embargoed until they get Communism completely down and prove it is a system that can sustain itself-a system that does not need injections of foreign capital to function, nor radical border expansion, nor propping up by international bodies.
Cuba as a Laboratory of the Proletarian Worker's Paradise, along with North Korea, should remain free from Westernizing influences, to pursue its own destiny and achieve the perfect, classless, stateless society.
IOW-keep the embargo not to overthrow the regime, but to give Cubans a chance to achieve their dreams without interference.
14 - Cannonshop
We must keep the Bourgoise out of Cuba! (It's for the Children...)
15 - pablo
Cannon,
No sanctions against China buddy?
16 - roger nowosielski
Cannon,
Now, your #13 and 14 seem odd to me. Number one, you can't expect the whole countries to remain isolated in this day and age. It's unrealistic. Number two, the "bourgeois influence" is anyway already on the wane - worldwide, I say - because of this crisis and it's to the good; I don't think it will ever be as strong as it had (don't forget, there is a new world in the making).
Number 3: I agree with Mark (#3): "US policy of waging economic warfare on civilian populations through sanctions must be ended."
17 - roger nowosielski
To add: rather unusual streak of idealism for someone as practical-minded as you seem to be.
Besides, if socialistic elements (I don't know whether you're being facetious here or not) are to be allowed to work so as to prove themselves as it were, it should not be done in an isolated setting (like some kind of laboratory) but in spite of the "corrupting influence of capitalism." Don't forget free will.
Now, that would be proof!
18 - Cannonshop
#15 China's too late. They bought into the whole "Work for what you got" meme that's corrupted the West, instead of Communist, they're just another capitalist Tyranny-but Cuba's remained Pure, largely due to not having American Businessmen buying their officials. (Esp. American Bankers...)
#16 Why not? Iran's doing fine, hell, they've developed an industrial and manufacturing base after decades as a Client State under their previous regime. If Islamic Fundamentalists can build a strong local economy without American help, Cuba, with its ideological purity and Communist/Socialist ideals should have no problem living without U.S. money (After all, they have a great number of fellow travellers in Europe, South America, and China if they're really hard up for cash, and there's canada, too...)
Fact is, I'm being a bit facetious here (or couldn't you tell?) BUT...if something works, it will work in isolation. It will work without U.S. assistance from U.S. taxpayers, or MFN status, or WTO assistance or World Bank assistance. If it won't work, none of those will MAKE it work-at best you prolong the misery while allowing the perpetrators to continue to abuse a broken system. (this also applies here in the U.S.-corporate welfare is the worst of socialism and the worst of Capitalism joined together in unholy matrimony to increase the damage done by both.)
Upshot is that if anything, isolating Cuba provides the world with a direct example of a Socialist Future-once everyone's a Socialist, it's exactly the SAME as operating a socialist state in isolation. Putting a finger on the scales out of 'humanitarian feelings' just makes the damage perpetual.
19 - roger nowosielski
Cool point. I see what you're doing. What threw me of, I suppose, I didn't see this bent of mind before on the basis of past comments.
So you're viewing it as a "social experiment," then, in a matter of speaking. If that's the case, I see your point.
20 - Cannonshop
I believe in Experimental rigour, and Empirical results over beautiful hypothesis and elegant calculation. It's important to look at the examples of such experiments when projecting on what may be desired for the future. I'm also NOT a believer in "Too big to Fail"-adding size to a failing system just adds to the failure. Cuba is a laboratory of Communist ideology, so is North Korea-if the ideology works, then there should be no problem with it functioning within their internal mechanisms-if it doesn't, propping up a failed system just guarantees continuing misery and continuing failure-which does NOT advance the cause of Justice OR Liberty in the long, or short runs.
Cuba should stand alone, make its reforms if needed,and be self-sufficient. We don't NEED another Haiti in this hemisphere.
21 - roger nowosielski
I see what you're getting at.
A good way to plan for the future, if only to see what develops. So interfering with it would render the experiment null and void. And in light of the fact that we need viable solutions, why not?
The world is changing before our very eyes, so why not experiment?
22 - Cannonshop
#21 Exactly. We're in this mess largely because of Academic Theory being practiced in preference to practical technique. Derivatives, the failure to learn from prior events like the S&L scandal, acceptance of comforting platitudes in place of reality, the ever weirder claims of people whose models don't work whether economics or atmospheric Sciences or Military conflicts...
We need to stop relying on the theorists, and actually do some gods-damn observation and analysis.
23 - M ark
Cuba has already served its Petri dish function and has provided its evidence: as predicted by theory, development of a 'workers' paradise' and the 'withering away' of the State requires an advanced industrial base.
24 - roger nowosielski
Cannon, #22,
That's as cool an argument I have heard yet regarding "social experimentation" on a larger scale, beyond the community level. And even though I am opposed to traditional versions of Marxism, your argument is convincing.
So why not give Cuba a shot? What have we got to lose.
25 - Cannonshop
#23 Then they need to build one. On their Own. This goes back to the bullshit of "Too big to Fail"-if it's likely to work at all, it has to be able to rise and stand on its own, including developing an industrial base. mind you, when China did it, they discovered that Capitalism is Good-they still like their one-party rule, but Capitalism seduced them away-largely with American Money at the start. If they truly want Communism with the whole "Whithering of the state" thing, they need to build it, not have it handed to them by someone who isn't interested in joining their vision of heaven-on-earth.
#22 I'm suggesting we truly need to GIVE them that shot-by making sure they're left alone...and that means, keeping a separation between them, and the United States overwhelming and overpowering economic interests. Cuba's had a long time to get there, any day now, they just might...if they're left alone. On the other hand, if they're funded by outside interests, they'll never get the society they have stated they wish to have-they'll just be someone's client state with nice beaches.