North Korea's Restrictions

North Korea more than likely is the most abusive administration on Earth. Moreover human rights screens are by and large banned from the nation, as are radio correspondences amongst citizens and outsiders. A few journalists and human rights screens have been fruitful in revealing insights about the hidden government's arrangements.

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.

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.

There are many countries that the United States frequently traded with who are now under a set of economic sanctions today. The sanctions were designed to restrict a country to the resources of their country and their allies until they comply with specific request. The US-Cuban sanctions were suppose was supposed to be in place until democracy and human rights were restored in Cuba. One effect of the sanction resulted in Cuban citizens only being able to purchase vehicles made before 1958. Although this is a minor effect of sanction, can you imagine if you were only able to possess a microwave that was made before 1958?

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.

Comparatively, the issue of unilateral trade with Cuba has sparked major attention over the past two decades. From Cuban cigars to sugar, few of the many exports from Cuba the United States does not allow into the country. So does the United States import to Cuba? Surprisingly, yes and in fact the United States has been, in the last decade, the number one country that imports goods to Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act was enacted in the year 1996, which extended territorial application of the Embargo to apply to foreign companies trading with Cuba; the act also penalized foreign companies who were reportedly trafficking in the property of the United States citizens, but confiscated in Cuba (Helms-Burton Act: Resurrecting the Iron Curtain). So yes,

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

Supporters of the legislation believe that prohibiting foreign investment will quicken Castro’s downfall. (Close Up Foundation) Many debate on the issue of why the U.S. should or shouldn’t keep the ebargo against Cuba. These debates deal with the effects of the Embargo on Cuba’s economy, humanitarian rights and health of the people of Cuba. The embargo today places a ban on subsidiary trade, Licensing, shipping and humanitarian aid. (Close Up Foundation) In 1992, the Cuban Democracy act imposed a ban on subsidiary trade with Cuba. This ban restricted Cuba’s ability to import medicines and medical supplies from third country sources. There have also been corporate buy-outs and mergers between U.S. and European pharmaceutical companies thus adding to the number of companies permitted to do business with Cuba. Under the Cuban Democracy Act, The U.S. Treasury and Commerce Departments are allowed to license individual sales of medicines and medical supplies, supposedly for humanitarian reasons to make up for the embargo’s impact on health care delivery. According to the U.S. corporate executives, the licensing provisions are so tough as to have had the opposite effect. With this statement, it is assumed that there are fewer licenses given out for humanitarian reason therefore favoring the embargo and aiding in the downfall of health in Cuba. Since 1992, the embargo has prohibited ships from loading or unloading cargo in U.S. ports for 180 days after

To better understand and appreciate the embargo in Cuba, one must examine the history behind an unnecessary act. According per the Editorial Board of The New York Times, the concept of the embargo to the United States Congress is to keep the outdated policy upon the Island of Cuba and its people. Gomez and Szabo from USA Today confirms, “President Obama and Cuban President, Raul Castro, have moved to normalize relations with Cuba without any further consideration of removing the Embargo from the Island any time soon” (Gomez and Szabo). It is time for the embargo to come to an end because this outdated policy has separated

The Cuban Embargo is restricting Cuba as a whole from progressing and advancing their technology. They face economic constriction through the embargo, which inhibits them from trading with other countries, cutting off the availability to necessary resources like current medical supplies. The U.S has continued to bully Cuba with the embargo. Even after 50 years, the United States has taken limited action to end the embargo and has attempted to keep Cuba under foot. As their own sovereign state, they have the obligation to make their own decisions as a country rather than live under the blanket control of a nation living with a 50 year-old temper tantrum demanding nothing but democratization.

When Canadian laws collide with laws in the United States with reference to trade with Cuba, which side prevails? More specifically, when an American subsidiary is operating in Canada and engages in profitable trade or export-related activities with Cuba which is illegal from the point of view of the U.S. Department of Justice what will happen to that U.S. subsidiary in Canada? Which side is right and which side is in the wrong? Is it fair for an American subsidiary operating in Canada to be held accountable for what some view as archaic U.S. laws that forbid any trade with Cuba? These issues and others related to the U.S. embargo on trade with Cuba will be presented in this paper.

Before President Obama came to office, there was a more restricted import for travelers that traveled to Cuba. The United States of America and Cuba had restrictions on what people could bring into and take out of the country. For instance, the people had limited number of personal items people can take to the country. It went all the way to where people were only allowed to bring a certain amount of personal things they could take. Travelers had to pay money if they wanted something shipped with them that is electronic. Computers, game stations, and televisions are items you had to pay a lot of money if you wanted them to be shipped. The amount of things that the travelers could bring with them were limited. The people that were to travel

The economic interest of the Unites States greatly outweighs the benefit of maintaining a Cuban Embargo and should be the motive for its repeal. The intent of the original embargo was to prevent the Castro regime from assuming power and to deter foreign investment. Both of these initiatives have failed and the consequences of a decades old embargo land squarely on the general population of Cuba and the business interests of the Unites States. American business have much to gain with the removal of the Cuban Embargo. Business opportunities abound in the agriculture market, banking sector, medical field, and construction industries.

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.