Essay Reconciling the Cuban Embargo

Another reason forimplementing the embargo on Cuba concerns the corrupt communist government andUS hopes of promoting a transition to a democratic system. On February 3, 1962,President Kennedy was confident that “Castro was moving toward theestablishment of a to! talitarian regime in alliance with the Soviet Union”(DeVarona 7). This raised a huge national defense issue since Cuba is only 90miles from US soil. The US government claims that the transition from communismto democracy will help Cuba flourish, as other democratic countries in thewestern hemisphere have. (“Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of1996”).

In Contesting Castro, the author, Thomas Paterson, attempts to give reasons for what caused the disconnect between the United States and Cuba. He supports his reasoning by giving his readers many different accounts, quotes, and views from the people who were involved in the many different problems that led up to the severed relationship. After reading through the book, Paterson does an excellent job of explaining the sometimes-complex circumstances that led to the United States and Cuba not having a relationship.

Oct 2003: US President George Bush announces fresh measures designed to hasten the end of communist rule in Cuba, including tightening a travel embargo to the island, cracking down on illegal cash transfers, and a more robust information campaign aimed at Cuba. A new body, the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, is created.

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.

One of the most controversial and widely debatable issues that have been discussed extensively in international legislation for several decades is the Helms-Burton Act. The main controversy surrounding the Helms-Burton Act is the resistance from the Cuban government regarding the features of the legislation. The resistance is a clear demonstration of the legality of property claims despite of the passage of time. Throughout history, rarely has an initiative by the American government to enforce its political opinion on economies of other countries generated much anger like the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity or Helms-Burton Act. Even though President Clinton initially opposed the legislation, it was enacted after the downing of two planes by Cuban Air Force that were flown by members of an anti-Castro organization in America. The enactment of this legislation resulted in the America's Cuban Conundrum whose main issues are addressed in this article.

to sell products in Cuba, and that it would no longer penalize other nations for

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

Although the US population did not have an extremely large interest in Cuba issues with this country were largely ones that were pursued because of lobbying by interest groups (Pastor). Although most Florida residents favored Clinton’s actions involving immigration standards and legislation for Cuba the Cuban-American community was not pleased and chose to act (Pastor). The Cuban-American community had Senator Jesse Helms and Congressman Dan Burton introduce a bill used to try to topple Fidel Castro and his regime (Hillyard, and Miller). This bill had the goal of “tightening the embargo, discouraging foreign investment, and precluding meaningful negotiations until Fidel Castro was removed from power. (Pastor)” Although this bill passed it was widely criticized by the international community because of the various economic results that it created (Hillyard, and Miller). By acting in both of these countries to both appease part of his constituency as well as to deal with foreign policy issues President Clinton made the correct choice to act when looking at what he felt was best for America at the time. Clinton not only made these choices out of political self-interest but also because he felt that he was making the best decisions for the US’s interests. Clinton’s motivation to act in each of these countries was not solely being advanced by the agendas of interest groups but also out of interest for securing our borders.

The United States continues an embargo against Cuba "so long as it continues to refuse to move toward democratization and greater respect for human rights".

Trade helps in business growth and it helps the economy of the country as the different business enterprises can learn from other businesses’ ideas and would help in the growth of the enterprises with its global competitiveness. The embargo may have been effective in the times of Cold war but in the modern times it is perceived as useless especially for the Cuban-American families and business enterprises that are looking for opportunities in Cuba.