Babalu Blog

The Worcester editorial writer is either lying outright about the origins of the embargo, or worse, thats how its being taught in our public schools.

I have never supported the restrictions on family visits and remittances. But, I have always thought that the embargo was, with its pros and cons, a positive thing. At present, however, I am starting to wonder whether enforcing what remains of the embargo isn't more harmful than helpful.

Lifting the embargo would remove the excuse that the regime's economic failures are caused by the embargo.

It will result in more money circulating in the economy (both state controlled and black market), thereby improving the lives of ordinary Cubans.

The easier it becomes to take care of basic needs such as food, clothing, etc. the greater the interest in other fundamental things such as greater freedom of expression, association, travel. The more you have, the more you want and demand.

Lifting the embargo would increase "people to people" contact. I know you guys view this with great suspicion. But, to borrow from Yoani, if Cubans start to believe that they are free, then they will start to act like they are free; and, that can have a powerful effect on the mindset of people who have been "hypnotized" by the regime. Imagine 100,000 cuban-americans walking around La Habana during any given week this summer. They will speak their mind, they won't whisper out of fear, they will display freedom of action and thought, it can be contagious.

The embargo, as presently constituted does nothing for the freedom of Cuba. I know the argument, it deprives the castro dictatorship of money. But, that hasn't put an end to it in 50 years. I'm starting to think we should try something different. What do you all think?

Lifting the embargo would remove the excuse that the regime's economic failures are caused by the embargo.

I cant tell you how many times Ive heard this and from a plethora of sources. That in and of itself refutes the argument. If everyone already knows the embargo is an excuse, then why dont we focus on whats NOT the excuse?

It will result in more money circulating in the economy (both state controlled and black market), thereby improving the lives of ordinary Cubans.

It depends on what your definition of "improvement' is. Will more money circulating in Cuba be cause for the free expression of thoughts? Will more money circulating in Cuba be cause for a free and open press? Will more money circulating in Cuba be cause for the release of political prisoners? How will more money circulating in Cuba help an Oscar Biscet?

Or, will more money circulating in Cuba have an adverse effect? If every business is state owned or controlled and if even black market cash ends up under the control of the government, then doesnt it stand to reason that this same government that has oppressed its people for half a century, with relatively limited means, will be even more empowered by an economic influx?

Lifting the embargo would increase "people to people" contact.

There's been people to people contact for decades and NOTHING HAS CHANGED. What is it, exactly, about the American tourist that makes them the magical end all of tyranny?

But, to borrow from Yoani, if Cubans start to believe that they are free, then they will start to act like they are free; and, that can have a powerful effect on the mindset of people who have been "hypnotized" by the regime.

How is it, exactly, that lifting the embargo will make Cubans believe they are free? It defies reason, once again. What it will do is prove that native Cubans are truly second class citizens, when compared to foreigners and their foreign brethren.

Imagine 100,000 cuban-americans walking around La Habana during any given week this summer. They will speak their mind, they won't whisper out of fear, they will display freedom of action and thought, it can be contagious.

I bet there's tens of thousands of Cuban exiles in Cuba as we speak. here in Miami, you cant spit without hitting a Cuban that travels to Cuba as often as possible. And I can personally attest to the fact that they WILL NOT speak freely there or even here for fear of reprisal against their families in Cuba.

I admire youre idealism, but that "let's try something different argument" without at the least a pragmatic, historically accurate study of the possible consequences makes no sense at all in this stage of the game.

Let me address a couple of your points:

Many in Cuba still believe that "el bloqueo" is a cause of much of their misery. They have been brainwashed with this their entire lives. Removing the excuse would help open some eyes. As an aside, I'm starting to think that on this shore we have been brainwashed our entire lives to believe that keeping the embargo somehow helps the cause of Cuba. I'm starting to think they are two sides of the same false coin. The embargo is not the main cause of the economic misery in Cuba. Likewise, it is not helpful to the freedom of Cuba. Neither proposition is true.

"improving the lives" to me means putting more money in the pockets of cubanos de a pie, making it easier to afford food, a new rice cooker, a working stove. If the day-to-day "trajines" become easier, it creates space for thoughts about other things, like freedom of speech association, etc. Also, we humans are funny animals. We are never satisfied. The more we have, the more we want: dale un dedo, and they will want the whole hand. It just might work, and it certainly won't hurt.

"People-to-people", I was referring to Cuban-to-Cuban more so than American-tourist-to-Cuban. The worst thing fidel has done is rend us apart. A process were we come together, one family at a time is needed to move forward to the next stage in Cuba's history. The mistrust, the lack of understanding, the fear and misconceptions between Cubans, must be washed away. I believe this can be accomplished one person at a time, one family at a time. That is why I am talking about 100,000 Cuban-Americans in La Habana on any given week. So "lifting the embargo" to allow Cuban-Americans to travel there will help loosen the chains. You bring up Biscet. I have heard it said that he is the freest man in Cuba, even as he sits in his dark cell. Why? Because he thinks as a free man and acts as a free man. Freedom is catching. Lets start an epidemic.

You call me an idealist. I'll gladly accept that. But, I think my idealism is rooted in reality. I used to believe as you do. But, it hasn't worked. If the purpose of the embargo was to bring freedom to Cuba, it hasn't worked. Why not try something that holds some promise? Do I have all the answers. . . of course not. Are there any guarantees? Of course not. But things are happening whether raul or fidel want them to or not. Lets contribute to the change rather than holding fast to old mechanisms that have not worked.

First of all, let's start out with the correct premise that the embargo was placed in retaliation for the illegal expropriation of property of American companies and individual citizens, as it stands it has been a deterrent to any regime since to these types of internationally illegal actions. NO MORE AMERICAN PROPERTY HAS BEEN STOLEN OVERSEAS BY ANY FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS, AND REGIMES THAT HAVE, HAVE HAD TO PAY RESTITUTION TO U.S. CITIZENS AND COMPANIES. So as you can see, the embargo HAS WORKED with regards to its intent. Have Cuban citizens been hurt, of course, but, that was brought upon them by their monarchy, not by the U.S. Should we lift the successful embargo now? I believe not. It should be strengthen even more and now.

JGP,

Yes, the embargo was put in place in retaliation for the illegal expropriation of American assets. I am not disputing that. What I question is the continued usefulness of the embargo as a means of achiving freedom for Cuba. As you correctly point out, it was not originally intended as a tool to achieve freedom for Cuba, and I contend, that it serves no such purpose. It is there merely for the benefit of the US Government. You admit that it hurts "regular" Cubans. Why would we want to do that?

So, why should Cuban-Americans continue to support a diplomatic tool that does not serve the interests of achiving a free Cuba?

You say, without explaining, that "it should be strengthened even more and now." Why? What would that accomplish?

Anyone who doesn't realize Castro, Inc. will ALWAYS come up with an excuse for its miserable failure is at best SERIOUSLY naive. Take away one excuse, and another one (or several) will replace it. Count on it. If it's one thing these people know how to do, is to deny and deflect blame.

In all honesty, IM TOTALLY AND COMPLTETELY TIRED AND SICK of arguing about the embargo. To date, I have heard it all in regards to its lifting and have yet to hear on reasonable argument and have yet to be convinced.

Little gator,

How does the embargo, exactly, hurt the people of Cuba?

Please post a list of reasons.

Asombra,

You are probably right about coming up with other excuses. But, why make it so easy for them by continuing to insist on a failed policy?

Please explain to me how the 50 year-old embargo has helped bring freedom to Cuba? As JGP points out, above, it was not originally intended as a tool to help free Cuba. It was put in place to protect American interests, it continues in place as nothing more than a breadcrumb tossed at the Cuban-American constituency. It serves as a smoke screen for the U.S. government's utter failure to take any real steps to remove the castro dictatorship. "See, we are doing 'something.'" Bosh.

So, why continue to pretend it serves some real purpose?

Val,

First,I'll point out that it was JGP, above, who stated that "Have Cuban citizen's been hurt? Of course."

Beyond that, I'll answer your question with a question Isn't the embargo's purpose to deprive the Island of the economic benefits of trade with the US?

Finally, you may be sick and tired of arguing about it, but it remains an issue of great interest and importance. And, as sick and tired as you may be, it is frequently brought up in this blog's posts. That elicits comments, both in favor of continuing the embargo, such as it is, and in favor of discontinuing the embargo.

Finally, I disagree with you. I think all my arguments are reasonable, although, it does appear true that you "have yet to be convinced." That is no fault of your own. As with the people in Cuba, you have heard the same litany over and over since you were a little kid. Right or wrong it is ingrained in your consciousness. They think the "bloqueo" is to blame for all their problems. You think the embargo is some sort of shining Excalibur to slay the castros. I have come to believe that both are wrong.

Maybe we can start by answering one question: How has the 50 year old embargo brought freedom to Cuba?

LG,

Maybe we can start by answering one question: How has the 50 year old embargo brought freedom to Cuba?

this is what we call in debate a "strawman". You know perfectly well that said embargo was never meant to bring freedom to Cuba by toppling the regime. We've been over this so many times that I just wont get into it.

I will tell you what, though, when the Cuban regime makes a statement like this one:

"Without dollars there is no counterrevolution."

Like it did today, it just reinforces my support for the embargo, and restrictions and limits on remittances. Moreover, it makes me want to strengthen them all.

LittleGator:

I respect that your argument is based on what you believe to be best for Cuba. Even though I disagree with your argument, I could not fault you for not caring about the Cubans on the island that have to deal with the regime day in and day out. The purpose of my post was to point out how those who care little, if any, about Cuba, cling to any event or nonevent to start clanging the “end the embargo now” bell.

With that said, I would like to make a point that I think you are missing. Regardless of whether the embargo is supposed to achieve regime change in Cuba or not, that is not the reason it was put in place. It was enacted to address illegal actions taken by the totalitarian regime in Cuba. For the US to remove this embargo without solving the issue that caused it in the first place would not only send a very bad message to the rest of the world, but it would also open a Pandora’s box of lawsuits and court claims. The US cannot rescind this embargo without a solution to the issue of stolen properties. A solution to these stolen properties cannot be obtained without cooperation from the Cuban regime. Therefore, the end of the embargo lies in the hands of castro, Inc., not on the US. Unless, of course, you are also advocating that the US tell the individuals and corporations that had billions of dollars worth of property stolen from them that they are sh*t out of luck and are not getting a dime or receiving their constitutionally guaranteed right to legal recourse.

The regime in Cuba brought this embargo upon themselves, and unfortunately, they are the only ones that can get rid of it. We can argue all day about whether it will bring down the castro monarchy or not, but the truth is that it doesn’t really matter if it does. Its original purpose is still valid and in that aspect, it has worked flawlessly.

Alberto,

I understand why the embargo was instituted. But, for years, some in the Cuban-American community have hailed it as a means to get rid of castro. It wasn't instituted for that purpose, and it has not served that purpose.

Your point about US Citizen claims is not well taken. Are you aware that virtually all US corporations and individuals whose property was confiscated have already received compensation in the form of tax credits for their losses? There are few, if any US Citizens who have pending claims from the nationalizations. Hence, there is no Pandora's box of lawsuits and court claims. The only claim pending is between the government of the US and the government of Cuba to determine how much the US government will accept to settle the claims it "bought" from its citizens.

You make my case in your last two sentences. The purpose of the embargo is to satisfy American interests. It has nothing to do with freedom for Cuba, or the interests of Cubans. It was never intended as a tool to free Cuba, and has not been effective for that purpose. So, to have the Cuban-American community be the standard bearer for this policy boggles the mind.

I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I will ask: are you acknowledging that the embargo serves no useful purpose when it comes to the freedom of Cuba?

I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I will ask: are you acknowledging that the embargo serves no useful purpose when it comes to the freedom of Cuba?

Again, another strawman. Dont even answer this Alberto.

Val,

I read your other post about "without dollars there is no counterrevolution." (repeated above) How do you interpret that statement to mean that the regime is in dire staights?

I think I'm missing something.

Afraid of the answer, Val? That is twice now that you have refused to answer, and have even told someone else not to answer.

Why so strongly support something that has no proven effect on the freedom of Cuba? Other than protecting American interests, as Alberto has pointed out, what does the embargo do for Cubans, or even for Cuban-Americans?

I once believed as you do, but logic dictates that we modify our views on this. If I am wrong, tell me how.

Tax credits, LittleGator? Are you serious?

Taking a tax credit (or business loss) does not indemnify the castro regime, nor anyone else. All of the individuals and corporations still have a legal claim to their property and if the opportunity arises, you know was well as I that those corporations will go after what is rightfully theirs.

No one has given up their right to ownership in exchange for a “tax credit.” No one has indemnified the castro regime in exchange for a "tax credit."

And in response to your rhetorical question, I ask you this: What purpose is served by giving the castro regime a victory in the hopes it will eventually help the Cuban people when for fifty years, and billions of foreign currency pumped into the Cuban economy, there has been no positive effect on the Cuban people?

Since when does logic consist of simply doing the opposite to achieve a goal?

The way I see it is that the embargo has served and continues to serve a very useful part of American foreign policy as a deterrent to unlawful confiscation of American property. The U.S. Government was correct and continues to be correct in protecting American property anywhere in the world. That's what governments are supposed to do and lookout for the safe being of their citizens anywhere in the world. If the monarchy had had the sense to not violate the legal property rights of Americans, it would not have had to deal with any embargo. The monarchy, by its illegal actions, is solely responsible for any harm to Cuba. Not even Cubans on the island believe the cause of their ills is due to the embargo. I believe the embargo needs to be strengthen and all transactions with Cuba ended right now. I would even argue that the Cuban Adjustment Act (CAA) of 1966 no longer serves any purpose and that should be annulled. If the embargo is made stronger and enforced (no trips, except humanitarian, religious, journalistic, maybe sports, etc.) and family remittances further restricted and the CAA annulled, I believe that a free Cuba would almost happen immediately.

Alberto,

You are right about the tax credits. My explanation, above, was not clear. Most US citizens (corporate and individuals) long ago took tax credits for their loss. And, you are right, that does not extinguish any claim they may have. But, ultimately, any settlement of those claims is between the government of the US and the government of Cuba. The point is that the embargo is not there to benefit Cubans, and hasn't benefited Cubans.

Moving to the more important issue. There are two "effects" to lifting the embargo. One, as you point out, is a benefit to the current Cuban government. Hence, one could argue to keep the embargo because it will "help" the Cuban government. That is a valid argument.

One can also argue that lifting the embargo will benefit the Cuban people by growing the economy of the Island, making staples more generally available, making it easier to purchase farming equipment, construction equipment and supplies, etc. This, too, is a valid argument. I believe that at this time more can be gained by helping ordinary Cubans improve their lot, than can be gained by continuing to impose travel restrictions, restrictions on remittances, etc. These restrictions have proven worthless to liberate Cuba. I am arguing that trying something different might just work. Again, is there any guarantee? Of course not. But this option should not be so easily discarded, while we cling to something that has clearly not worked. And so there is not confusion, when i say "worked" I am not talking about safeguarding US interests. I am talking about bringing freedom to Cuba, bettering the lives of ordinary Cubans.

By the way, the question wasn't rhetorical. If the answer is that the embargo has not served to bring freedom to Cuba. Then why keep it? Just discard it, take away the excuse, put something else in its place that just might work.

LittleGator:

Again I must reiterate that "logic," as you like to put it, does not mean just doing the opposite of something that hasn't worked. You cannot do a complete reversal of direction and "hope" that things work out better. Besides, if this reversal were to strengthen the regime by giving it a much needed infusion of capital, the Cuban people would be in much worse shape than they are now.

To me, giving the regime any access to American capital in the hopes that it would spur the population to revolt is akin to giving a criminal barricaded in a house with hostages a gun in the "hopes" that he will accidentally shoot himself instead of the hostages. Perhaps the regime will make a mistake and collapse if the markets were opened up, just like perhaps the criminal with the hostages might make a mistake and accidentally shoot himself instead of his hostages.

Sure, it could happen, but it is very unlikely.

Logic dictates that one look at all the possibilities one's actions may have. The regime has shown to be quite adept at accumulating foreign capital into its coffers while maintaining their boots on the neck of the Cuban people.

It is actually quite illogical to me that you would think that American capital would cause an opposite effect.

As of today, the embargo can not be removed UNLESS the regime releases all political prisoners. So if we follow LittleGator's advice what message do we send Biscet and the family of the ladies in white? That doing business with Cuba is more important than their freedom? That "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em"?

Bullshit. No capitulation to the fucking murderers.

Little Gator, let's cut through all the crap.

In your continued argument FOR lifting the embargo, you make the assumption that this cash infusion from the US will suddenly lift the standard of living for the average Cuban.

But the evidence, which you refuse to address, is overwhelming that it won't. The rest of the world has no embargo on Cuba and trades with Cuba freely, but the standard of living for the average Cuban keeps going down, down, down.

Why? Because all the money is going the regime, NOT -- say again, NOT -- to the people. It is pointless for you to say another word without directly addressing this point. (Moreover, what is it about American money that you think makes it somehow safe from the clutches of this kleptocratic regime?)

That the embargo has not freed Cuba yet doesn't automatically make it a failure in that regard. Regardless of the original intent of the embargo, lifting it would just help extend the life of the regime.

Consider also that the media seems to be finally, if grudgingly, admitting that Cuba really isn't a worker's paradise (in part because information technology now allows us, and sometimes Cubans themselves, to circumvent the MSM -- as in places like this blog -- is making it harder and harder to keep the truth about life in Cuba a secret), which means the international community is starting to very slowly turn against it, again however grudgingly. The regime is sinking deeper into isolation and poverty, and the last thing we need to do is give it a shot in the arm.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: