Rare is the time that I don't have a solid opinion about a subject. When it comes to Cuba, I'm mixed. This is one column in 100 where I will present some of the facts and opinions of both sides, and let you, the reader, make up your own mind.
Cuban President Fidel Castro leads the government with a strong Communist fist, which means his people are not free to speak their minds or travel freely to and from other nations as in Democratic countries.
On the other hand, are our sanctions against Cuba making a difference? After 40 years of rule, it is apparent that the Cuban people are not going to overthrow Castro's government. So would it actually help to have free trade with the country? Maybe being influenced by family members who are in the U.S., and by Western ways of thinking, could lead the people to rid themselves of such a detrimental form of leadership.
Congress' objections: Before passing a foreign aid package, the Senate rejected, 55-43, a proposal that would have eased restrictions on American citizens who want to travel to Cuba. Twice last year, U.S. lawmakers rejected any change in the embargo.
Sponsors said nearly 40 years of sanctions have failed to produce much impact on the policies of Cuba's Fidel Castro. They added that it made no sense to penalize Americans by not letting them visit Cuba and that the presence of more Americans on the island might have a beneficial effect.
"What's the purpose of a further isolation if in 40 years it hasn't produced a change?" asked Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., the prime sponsor of the amendment.
But opponents argued that it would undermine long-standing U.S. policy. Any significant change in policy toward Cuba is remote, because of opposition from key lawmakers in Florida and others across the country who are intent on getting rid of Castro's Communist government before accepting a lifting of sanctions.
"This is not the time for lifting any of the sanctions on Cuba," said Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla. "This is the time for us to hold the line on our policy."
Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., who opposes the move to relax the restrictions, said that even under the current setup, some 100,000 Americans a year have been visiting Cuba.
"Our argument with Fidel Castro is not over," Torricelli said.
Castro not making it easy: Cuba, for its part, has launched a $181 billion compensation claim against the U.S. for deaths and injury in what it calls a 40-year "dirty war" on Castro's government. And the nation has has started using the European currency, the euro, as a challenge to the "tyranny" and "absolute hegemony" of the U.S. dollar in international financial relations.
Clinton's foolhardy plan: The question arised again after Clinton's questionable refugee plan was tested last week. Under U.S. policy, Cubans who reach American shores are allowed to stay and eventually get work permits, but those found at sea -- even a few yards offshore -- are usually returned immediately to Cuba. In this case, a boatload of six Cubans were within 200 yards of shore when the Coast Guard intercepted the boat and forced them into the ocean with water cannons and pepper spray. Two made it to the beach and four were caught before making dry land. To be fair to the Guard, the boaters were using oars as weapons to prevent capture, but the Guard shouldn't have interfered with the Cubans at all, and let them make the short swim to shore.
The next night, the Coast Guard announced it would not send the refugees back to Cuba, an apparent reversal of standard policy. Even the four who never made it to shore were to be taken to an immigration center, where they will be checked for criminal records and likely released while applying for asylum.
"I just don't understand this," witness Enrique Pollack told WTVJ-TV. "I remember the images of people trying to cross the Berlin Wall and we're acting like Gestapo or the Stasi, keeping them from coming to freedom. They've been suffering for 40 years. Enough is enough."
Clinton's plan is as offsetting as his military "Don't ask, don't tell" fiasco, and if he wants a legacy, maybe he should consider lifting the embargo.
Is Cuba serious with counter-narcotics talk?: Four U.S. officials met in June with Cuban officials in Havana to discuss ways of improving counter-narcotics cooperation, amid protests from Cuban-American and anti-Castro lawmakers.
Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., said it was ridiculous for the Clinton administration to give Castro credibility on the drug issue. She said Castro is notorious for helping drug traffickers.
Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart who, like Ros-Lehtinen, is a Cuban-born South Florida Republican, prepared an indictment against the Castro government concerning tons of cocaine that entered the United States. The Clinton administration shelved the indictment in 1993 despite "massive" evidence of Cuban involvement with drug kingpins, the congressman said.
Barry McCaffrey, the White House drug control policy chief, said in May that Cuba has shown a willingness to help the U.S. fight international drug trade.
Canada's policy and religious freedom in question: Our neighbors to the north were once proud of their "constructive engagement" approach to Cuba, but are now cooling relations in a protest over human rights violations by the Cuban government.
Ministerial-level visits to Cuba have been postponed indefinitely after Havana jailed four prominent democracy activists to 3 1/2 to 5 years in jail, while diplomats and journalists were banned from the trial.
The government's tightening on political opponents, though, has not stopped Cuba's Roman Catholic Church from making great progress since Pope John Paul II's visit to the country 18 months ago, according to an archbishop.
Archbishop Pedro Meurice Esitiu said that baptisms were up and holding steady. Pastoral work in parishes also increased after the visit that "awakened hopes of new times," the archbishop said.
Is it pro or con for Castro to have the sanctions lifted?: Arturo Villar, publisher of Hispanic Market Weekly, said unless the U.S. changes its position toward the island and lifts the sanctions, Cuba will remain a closed economy and the legitimacy of Castro to maintain sovereignty will continue.
Otto Reich, president of Virginia-based consulting firm RMA International, Inc., reports that hundreds of American companies are willing to go to Cuba. The Fortune 500 most successful companies as well as large Cuban-American owned companies are willing to take the risk, he said, noting that the economic output of the 1.25 million Cubans living in the U.S. exceeds the GDP of the entire island, with a population of 11 million.
At the same time, two anti-Castro groups filed lawsuits last week against two dozen U.S. and foreign companies doing business with Cuba's government, saying the companies are aiding the oppression of island residents.
"These companies are nothing but collaboraters," said Eduardo J. Navarro, attorney for the plaintiffs. "If they had done the same thing during World War II with the Nazi regime, they would be sued as they rightfully are being sued today."
The Associated Press contributed to this column.
These are but a few of the discussions about Cuba. What will be done? Most likely, nothing as long as Castro is in power. So look for more of the same in the next century. But that doesn't mean we can't all have an opinion, no matter how contorted it may be.
Jeff's Editorial Page | Column Archives | Home