Global Policy Memo
Commentary and Counterpoint on World Affairs
Posted by Josh Goodman on April 8, 2009 at 8:43 pm
filed under Latin America
Tagged Castro, Cuba, Embargo
The Washington Post has an editorial calling out the Congressional Black Caucus delegation that recently visited Cuba for getting chummy with the Castros, while failing to call any attention to the human rights and pro-democracy situation in Cuba.
Now, I fully support loosening travel and gift restrictions for Cuban-Americans, a policy Obama is expected to announce at the Summit of the Americas next week, as well as loosening other restrictions on travel and increasing engagement with Cuba on various issues. The policy of completely ignoring and isolating Cuba has not remotely worked, and even the traditionally hardline Cuban-American National Foundation appears to have come around to the logic that loosening the embargo and engaging with Cuba may yield returns.
Yet, while the U.S. from its position of strength should take the first steps in engaging Cuba, there needs to be some indication that this will be a two-way street. The U.S. should not abandon its policy goals in Cuba — promoting democracy and human rights. It should just adopt policies that are more likely to achieve them.
Some of the statements from the Congressional mission to Cuba are downright shameful: “I think that what really surprised me, but also endeared me to him, was his keen sense of humor, his sense of history and his basic human qualities,” Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) said of Raul Castro.
But maybe Rush is on to something. Maybe Castro is still running Cuba as a Communist dictatorship in 2009 partly as a joke and partly to revel in the sense of history.
H/T: Babalu Blog.
Sphere: Related Content
Jeffrey Kessler
I basically agree with what you have said here, except for one thing: why should promoting democracy and human rights be the U.S.’s primarily policy goal for Cuba? I’m not denying that, necessarily, but why shouldn’t the goal be, say, to install a pro-U.S. government? Or are the two things the same?
Josh Goodman
I believe promoting democracy and human rights in other countries generally supports U.S. interests, as well as the interests of the people in those countries, and that the U.S. should strive to promote those goals wherever possible.
There are some countries where a rights-based democracy may not really be feasible at this time — because of lack of education, lack of a sufficient common identity, or for cultural, historical, or or other reasons — and in those cases, maybe a pro-U.S. government is in the U.S. interest, since there won’t be a democracy in any case.
But Cuba is not one of those countries. It is a small country with a clear national identity. I see no reason why it, like virtually all of Latin America today, cannot be a democracy. The earlier U.S. policy of supporting a pro-U.S. dictatorship in Cuba played a key role in bringing the current anti-U.S. dictatorship to power for the past 50 years.