A Cold War Relic Essay

The embargo will not eradicate Castro’s government, but it has economic effects that harms the people of Cuba. Historically the embargo has been an obstacle in the development of Cuba’s domestic economic activities. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Cuba lost their major means of economic support: An article published on the American Journal of Public Health confirms that in 1989 “The 60% Decline in Cuba's Gross domestic product is one of the steepest ever recorded” (Garfield and Santana 15). This drastic worsening of the economic conditions in Cuba was the catalyst for tightening the embargo: The Cuban Democracy Act was approved by Washington on 1992. This Act banned all trade of food and medications of USA companies with Cuba, and it prohibit ships from other countries to dock in American ports until six months after visiting the Island. The Act declares that severe monetary penalties will be implemented to those that violate the mentioned regulations. These economic sanctions are one of the causes why Cubans have had to deal with shortage, and high prices for food and other goods. Cuba could buy the majority of this products from the USA market, but instead has to pay higher transportation prices to get them from farther countries. An article published on the independent general medical journal The Lancet corroborates: “Tightening of the embargo lead to an abrupt cessation of supplies of food and medicine to Cuba

Embargoes are restrictions on trade between countries used to achieve some kind of goal. The United States has imposed an embargo on Cuba to encourage the Cuban government to change the way they run themselves because the United States does not agree with the system of government they have in place. This embargo enacts total restrictions on trade and travel between the United States and Cuba. The United States’ embargo against Cuba should be lifted because it is doing more harm than good to both countries involved.

In 1959, Cubareceived 74 percent of its imports from the US, and the US received 65 percentof Cuba’s exports. On February 3, 1962, the United States imposed a fulltrade embargo on Cuba, completely ending any type of trade between the twocountries. This embargo remains in effect today, more than four decades later,and has grown ! to be a huge center of debate and controversy (DeVarona 8).Opponents to the embargo argue that the embargo does nothing more than hurt theCuban people, while proponents argue that the embargo places pressure on Castroto repair Cuba’s mismanaged and corrupt government. Both the supportersand the opponents of this embargo have strong arguments and evidence to supportthese

As also stated by Mr. D’angelo, in a personal interview about the Cuban embargo, “Yes I think it will last until Cuban reforms, change in Cuban leadership…” This shows that many people, including professionals believe that the embargo will not end soon without the removal of the Castro’s. This idea of no Castro in the government makes sense since many speculate that even though Fidel is no longer is power he still has some influence over what his brother does. Vividly depicted, this is shown by a passage made by Catharine Moses from her book: “They might not like him, they might complain about him, might see his failing and might blame him for all the countries problems, but he is Fidel. He is in control of the island…”(pg. 7) In compliance, this just shows that many still believe he holds power and some hold truth to their hearts that it is Fidel’s Cuba. On an other aspect that goes hand and hand with the Cuban democracy Act is the declaration of John F. Kennedy that states that the goal of the embargo is to submit Cuba’s government into giving up its communist government. Evidently, this was the main goal of the embargo and Cuba has not, and for the foreseeable future, will not change its government from the communist one that it is known for. An idea and aspect that is clearly shown and supports the idea of containment, is that the embargo also

In the article, “Why Do We Still Have an Embargo of Cuba?” Patrick Haney explores the history of the embargo and the different factors which have maintained and tightened its restrictions over the past fifty years. The embargo consists of a ban on trade and commercial activity, a ban on travel, a policy on how Cuban exiles can enter the U.S., and media broadcasting to the island. These once-executive orders now codified into law by the Helms-Burton Act, have become a politically charged topic which wins and loses elections, spawned influential interest groups, and powerful political action committees.

The U.S. did not help their situation as they proceed to pressure and prevent other foreign nation from trade with them, resulting in Cuba to remain in isolation. This event not only hurt Cuba economically, but socially as well by depriving innocent people from access to the outside. However, the embargo was not meant to cause harm, instead it symbolizes a probable improvement in human rights. In 2016, the Human Right Watch, reported that Cuba was still, “repress dissent and discourage public criticism," resulting to be the primary reason the U.S. would consider lifting the embargo. The U.S. would like to see the Cuban government improve, in return, they would remove the ban on trade or commercial activities.

American international relations with Cuba have almost always been tense. The cold war solidified the growing negative relations, and the embargo embodied it. But now that the cold war is over, as is the Cuban missile crisis, we’re left to wonder if the embargo is really necessary. Should the United States lift the embargo of Cuba? All of the evidence, be it economic, diplomatic, or social, points to yes. We should lift the embargo.

In 1961 President John F Kennedy put together a doctrine, which altered from President Eisenhower’s one. It was to “Respond flexibly to communist expansion, especially guerrilla warfare.” (Roskin & Berry, 2010, p. 58) It was a time when the Cold War was at its height and nuclear weapons a mass threat and source of power. This doctrine was aimed at using alternative means before opening into combat. This, in light of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, it succeeded in doing.

When Fidel Castro took over Cuba by means of a revolution, he quickly established his government as the first openly Communist government in the western hemisphere. He petitioned the Soviet Union for aid, which was cheerfully given him. These events went against our current policies, as well as the Monroe Doctrine, which established us as the police force of the western hemisphere. Ninety miles away from the greatest bastion of Capitalism was now residing its greatest foe. This tense situation was brought to a boiling point by the arrival of

The U.S. imposed an Embargo against Cuba on Oct. 19, 1960. Has the time come to the United States to lift the five-decade embargo? The Embargo was a part of America’s Cold War strategy against the Soviet Union, imposed on the belief that Cuba was a threat to the U.S. since the Soviet Union was a danger to the National Security because of its alliance with the Soviet Union. Although Cuba would like the U.S to terminate the embargo against their country, the U.S. wants Cuba to make their situation a better living environment and to promote human rights for its citizens before any sanctions are removed.

Cuba and the Affects of the Embargo The island nation of Cuba, located just ninety miles off the coast of Florida, is home to 11 million people and has one of the few remaining communist regimes in the world. Cuba’s leader, Fidel Castro, came to power in 1959 and immediately instituted a communist program of sweeping economic and social changes. Castro allied his government with the Soviet Union and seized and nationalized billions of dollars of American property. U.S. relations with Cuba have been strained ever since. A trade embargo against Cuba that was imposed in 1960 is still in place today. Despite severe economic suffering and increasing isolation from the world community, Castro remains committed to communism. (Close Up

Inconsistency underlies the logic of the United States sanctions against Cuba. The relevance of the pre-1990 objectives of the embargo became obsolete with the end of the cold war. However, the so called “Cuban Democracy Act” came up with a new objective of bringing freedom and democracy to the people of Cuba. The act demands Cuba to establish electoral democracy. Put it in other words, the act asks Cuba to permit the establishment of multi-party system, conduct periodic elections, permit freedom of press, and build democratic institutions which guarantee the protection of the human and democratic rights of the people. These objectives by themselves are noble ideas worth fighting for and promoting all over the world. Yet, the problem with the “Cuban Democracy Act” is it proposes to strengthen the economic sanctions against Cuba to bring about these ends. This requirement levied upon Cuba contradicts the basis of the United States relations with other countries around the world. Countries like China and Saudi Arabia don’t have electoral democracy whatsoever, moreover they are more brutal than the Castro regime in Cuba. However, they enjoy the status of most favored nation in their relation with the United States (Griffin 171). Thus, the question is what is the logical foundation for the

I think that the Embargo act of Cuba should not be uplifted simply because they do not meet the requirements of business in the trade industry. The embargo also known as the blockade signed by President Kennedy Feb. 3, 1962, consist of economic sanctions against Cuba and restrictions on Cuba travel and commerce for all people and business under the U.S jurisdiction (Cuba-embargo.procon.org) and acts of communist powers. It will only benefit the Government of Cuba and not be beneficial to the citizens within the Island meaning that the money of financial gain only supports the Government and overall not the biggest satisfaction of the society in the Cuban Island. The political viewpoint of the perspective is that the United States having more than 75 countries they do trade with around the world, Cuba that only has done trade with just about 7 countries such as companies of Canada, Europe, and Latin America, those countries have not enjoyed economic relationship. I personally think that their will be no difference if the president was to uplift the act against Cuba they have failed to meet the expectations of deliberately honoring their commitment as a friend or business to relay on. In 2012 Cuba was deeply in debt and owed $13.6 billion although few countries still remain to import and export goods with them. For over 55 years the Unites States has had restrictions hold against Cuba since 1982 the

The Cuban people have been under the harsh dictatorship of both Felgenico Batista and Fidel Castro. They both had very strict policies and gave the Cuban people limited or no freedom at all. Batista and Castro were similar but yet different. One major difference that they had was that Batista was friendly with the United States and he had respect for American interest. On the other hand Fidel Castro hasn’t been as friendly with the United States, so the U.S has a trade embargo that restricts and American company to do business with Cuba and also U.S citizens are prohibited from traveling to Cuba unless for special circumstances.

Able to weather a variety of political leaders, economic events, and historical eras, the U.S. embargo of Cuba is the longest and harshest embargo by one state against another in modern history. Following Castro’s overthrow of the Batista government in 1959 and threats to incite revolutions elsewhere in Latin America, the Unites State cancelled its trade agreement to buy Cuban sugar. Then, following a series of increasing hostile events, the United States severed diplomatic relations and initiated a full trade embargo in 1962. Trade between the United States and Cuba stopped. Spurred by the collapse of communism more than thirty years later, Congress