Essay On Cuban Embargo

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

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.

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

The Cuba Policy came into effect to end all relations between the United States and Cuba. The U.S. policy toward Cuba is controlled by the embargo, which contains economic agreements and restrictions on travel to Cuba. The effect of this policy is to minimize commercial, political and resident relations between the United States and Cuba. The State Department indicated that the purpose of the embargo was to have a nonviolent transition to a secure, democratic form of government and respect for human rights in Cuba.

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.

Goods or services of Cuban origin may not be imported into the United States either directly or through third countries” (2001) . According to the Cuba Policy Foundation, the United States loses up to $4.84 billion annually in trade and exports alone (Pepper 2009) . The amount of money being disregarded because of now defunct reasons is radically lacking in logic. A simple repealing of the embargo would bring both the United States and Cuba great economic success.

“Raw sugar accounts for one quarter of Cuba’s export less than half a billion dollars” (The Economic Impact of Better US-Cuba Relations, 2015). Ending the embargo “Cuban exports can go from $0 to 5.8 billion” (US Cuba Embargo Pros and Cons: Renewed Relations Sets Caps and Limited Success for Businesses). Both economics can benefit massively from lifting the trade embargo this is because one of the most imperative exports of the Cuban economy is nickel. Nickel a mineral used in many industrial processes such as the creation of stainless steel, it can be a major use to the United States economy because it imports around 43% of nickel from the rest of the world therefore Cuba could benefit by entering the United States market. Cuba’s major import is refined petroleum which the United States is one of the largest producers of, the Cuban economy also imports wheat corn, meat, milk and soybeans which the United States also produces. Additionally, Cuba also exports rum and tobacco(cigars) which are said to be legendary in the United States. With the lifting of the embargo these products can be exported to the United States because Americans loves these clichés also, these exports can lead to a major enhancement in the Cuban economy because trade increases sales and profits, strengthen local competitiveness and diversification. Together the countries will be able to trade mutually and exchange

U.S. wanted Cuba to meet special requirements in order for the embargo to go into effect, including rules such as: transition to a democracy, demand Havana support small businesses in exchange for sheathing restrictions on remittances, denounce presence of either Fidel or Raul Castro in Cuban government, better living conditions for all Cuban citizens, absolutely no travel to Cuba, and promote human rights. Cuba has not yet met all requirements, but is currently working on them. Obama reversed some of these polices, such as, allowing U.S. citizens to send remittances to non-family members in Cuba and travel under license of religious or educational purposes. As of today United States citizens may travel to Cuba with only special reasons like religious or

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

The American political system and its structured relationships serve to reinforce the existence and stipulations of the Cuban trade restrictions and supporters persistently try to influence the U.S. Congress and the government in power to tighten the ban so as to incite and hasten the collapse of the communist regime in Cuba.

USA Today says that there is no reason to believe that a continuation of sanctions on Cuba will hasten the regime's demise or make life better for the Cuban people. This embargo has also harmed the Cuban people and lifting it will improve their lives. This embargo, in reality, has impoverished the Cuban people. Sanctions have harmed the Cuban people without weakening Castro's grip on power and have caused economic harm to the point that it is a human rights violation. This has made it far more expensive for Cuba to produce the food for its citizens. Likewise, lifting the embargo will improve the lives of Cubans. In this situation, engagement is the best way to produce change. Sen. Jeff Flake said it is time for Congress to take the next step of weakening or even better, ending the economic embargo on Cuba. Only congress can do this. Furthermore, the economy will improve in Cuba which will help decrease many of these human rights issues. Tourism will increase in

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

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.

The embargo has constrained the crossing of the borders for Cuban citizens, the exiles of Cuba and the businesses, its subsidiary to not be able to do their business in Cuba without facing penalties. This embargo has forbid the Cuban citizens’ contact to consumer goods that the United States presented. Cuba’s expansion of its infrastructure has also been limited therefore the country continues to be a poor country.