Why does the U.S. send the Cuban refugees back to Castro?

They have a hideous policy called 'wet foot dry foot.' It was instituted by Clinton, of course, and it says that if Cubans make it to the states, usually they can stay. If they are intercepted on the high seas (and there are boats looking for them), they get sent back. castro isn't living up to his bargain on wetfoot-dryfoot and anyone getting sent back is encountering retribution. It's a dirty lousy rotten policy and it needs to be stopped. Anybody at all fleeing castro ought to have a right to stay here.

a little known, seldomed mentioned "condition" of the policy is that the us interest section can "check up" on those sent back to make sure there are no "reprisals" but those that live outside of havanna, say oriente or the far off places are s.o.l. cause they dont have the people to check up on them.. BUT, its a condition in the agreement.. why it hasnt been enforced is beyond me (i think the burden is on the us here, to follow through and ensure these people have not been removed from jobs, suffer reprisals, etc)..

Alright, George Bush's quirkiness and anti-intellectualism can be endearing traits, and he himself appears to be an altogether likable man. I would like him, too, if he'd just stop sending Cuban refugees by the boatload to Castro. Such shameless flaunting of U.S. tradition as a haven for the oppressed would have been unthinkable during the Cold War. In Cuba, however, nothing has changed since the Cold War. But, for purposes of immigration, Cuba has apparently been "liberated" by U.S. policymakers because Cuban refugees are now routinely returned to Cuba under the assumption that they will not face punitive measures there. This assumption is on its face a lie and the height of disingenuousness on the part of those who claim to enforce U.S. laws, and, in particular, on the part of the chief law enforcer himself, President George Bush II. The Cuban Resettlement Act (1965) did not establish a "dry foot/wet foot" policy. This was purely the invention of Clinton and Reno, who never saw a law they wouldn't subvert. For 30 years (quite a long precedent!), Cuban refugees were admitted legally to the U.S. regardless of whether they reached land or were rescued on the high seas. Besides the element of luck (which should make us pity those stranded on the high seas even more), what difference is there between these two groups of refugees? Both are fleeing the same oppression and both are deserving of the same protections that the Law establishes for them. But George Bush has seen fit to adopt and make his own Clinton's tendentious reinterpretation of the Law. If he wanted to, George Bush could reverse Bill Clinton's heartless policy today. Such a policy shift (or, rather, restoration) would require no special laws, amendments or congressional imput. All the President has to do is inform his Attorney General than henceworth we will again be enforcing the Cuban Resettlement Act (1965) according to its original intent. That's all. George Bush is on record as supporting amnesty and legalization for illegal Mexican immigrants in the U.S. Why, then, does he continue to forcibly repatriate Cuban refugees? Why does his Coast Guard harass and abuse them every day, presumably at his orders or at the uncountered orders of his predecessor? George Bush is in the White House because Cuban-American voters in Florida put him there, as he has himself acknowledged on several occasions. What are Cuban-Americans, then, wasting their political capital on, since it certainly isn't being spent on behalf of Cuban refugees? Will some of the Bush supporters on this forum stop supporting him long enough to say one word on behalf of their own brothers?

Oh, gimme a break, MAT.

A little over the top, MAT. The CG is not harassing, they are just doing their job; they have orders. I do not doubt that those who are hurled back to communism suffer retribution and for that reason i would dump wet foot/dry foot but it's a complex matter - if the US is giving people political asylum free and clear, why are they making visits back there? That's not asylum, it's economic migration. Meanwhile, Haitians, who are fleeing some really bad stuff, including death sqauds, get sent back no matter what. My opinion: Just take everyone here who wants to be here on the condition that there are no, or limited, visits back. Don't like it? Go back and discuss it with castro.

Seriously MAT. I deleted your last comment. If you dislike Bush thats one thing, but dont place the blame on him for the wet foot/dry foot policy. And you certainly cant expect the POTUS to open up the cuban border and allow a huge number of immigrants to come into the states.

Because thats exactly what would happen. Thousands upon thousands of Cubans fleeing the island, many on rafts and many dying at sea, then those that get here causing havoc on the system and the economy.

If you wanna bash Bush, I suggest another blog. I aint going to blame the man for shit that isnt his fault.

MAT maybe you should read CheoMedalla's post under Lift The Travel Restrictions? for another approach to the wet foot/dry foot policy.

Mora, surely you have seen the video tapes of Coast Guard harassment? Of the Coast Guard using water hoses to dislodge the refugees from their rafts, preferring to drown them rather than give them even the infinitesimal chance of reaching freedom on their own? And what about the refugees who actually did reach shore while the Coast Guard tried to beat them back into the ocean? Weren't those video tapes played on the news were you live? I know I saw them, and I don't live in Miami.

I agree on your second point, Mora. No Cuban refugee, whether he came here 46 years ago or yesterday, should return to Cuba while it is under Castro's control. Such a visit negates the original grounds on which Cubans were parolled into the U.S., and if they do return, they should stay there.

Val: Bill Clinton isn't the president anymore. He was a vile, disgusting excuse for a human being; the greatest scoundrel who ever occupied the White House. But that does not excuse George Bush when he insists on following Clinton's policy regarding Cuban refugees. Don't you at least agree on that?

While I have my problems with the wet foot/dry foot policy, Bush inherited a prickly situation. It's a catch 22 for him. If he prevents Cubans from coming to the states he's screwed, and if he allows them all to come he's screwed.

Dont you think it's better to work on a policy that will help change this internally in Cuba as opposed to allowing a mass exodus from the island?

The very same people that leave Cuba are the very same people that Cuba needs.

Val: If you can change the policy without negotiating with Castro or obtaining his permission for any change in U.S. immigration policy regarding Cubans, then by all means try. As for that future mass exodus of Cubans that you predict, it will come regardless of what we do or don't do. Without Castro's draconian measures to prevent it, such an exodus will start the moment that he is no longer in power.

As long as parts of The Cuban Resettlement Act of 1965 remain Law, a mass exodus into the USA remains a real threat - a threat Castro has used effectively since Mariel to intimidate the US government. This law needs to be repealed asap so that this threat will not be effective any longer. Cubans should be treated just like any other illegal immigrant. AS far as I am concerned, that is what they are.

I am tired and embarassed of watching entire families of Cuban "asylum seekers" return to the island 6 months later and not feel one bit concerned about their safety or well being!

¡Ya no mas!

a threat with "dry foot/wet foot" whats to prevent castro from sending more "spies" or "terrorists".. alone, or in league with those that want to destroy thr usa, he could train a squad, make sure they have everything necessary to get here, they are "welcomed" with open arms, ("excuse me sir, is this the delta house? sure come on in"), they stay and they become sleepers.. and when the time is right, they could wreck havoc.. i cant be the only one who has thought of this and i wonder if homeland security has an eye on this..

M.A.T., I think you make some good points. Personally, I'd let the Cubans come in and send the other illegals to Cuba.

I think that's an excellent idea, Regina, and what's more, the Mexicans and Central Americans that we would send to Cuba would go there gladly. Whether they would stay there gladly is not a matter that need concern us.