Center for International Policy

Should the United States Remove Sanctions on Cuba?

By: Wayne S. Smith
March 2007
The Costco Connection

Our countries current Cuba policy is both illogical and counterproductive. Cuba poses no threat whatever to the security of the United States. In security terms, we can easily coexist with Cuba. It is a communist country, to be sure, but so are China and Vietnam. Yet we have cordial diplomatic and trade relations with them.

Yes, there are some 300 political prisoners in Cuba, and respect for civil rights of the Cuban people is not all one would hope for. But we have cordial relations with many countries that have more political prisoners than Cuba and far worse human-rights situations.

The most basic point, however, is that while the U.S. of course wishes to see Cuba move toward a more open society, our policy has exactly the opposite effect. The U.S. threatens and applies pressure, the Cuban government reacts defensively, calling for internal unity against the threat from the north. The result is the antithesis of the kind of atmosphere needed for liberalization.

We could accomplish far more by reducing tensions and beginning a dialogue to discuss our disagreements. Raul Castro, who is now acting president in light of Fidel's illness, has indicated Cuba's willingness to enter into such a dialogue with the U.S. The current administration, unwisely, has refused. And yet, recent statements coming out of Cuba make it clear that the majority of the dissidents and most religious leaders, the very people we say we want to help, are urging us to begin a dialogue with the Cuban government.

Our present policy accomplished nothing. On the contrary, the Cuban economy is recovering in rather impressive fashion, with a 12 percent growth rate last year, crucial new economic relationships with Venezuela and China, and a new oil field off the north coast.

Our present policy is an impediment to Cuba's moving in the direction we'd like to see it take. Cautious engagement would work far better.

Click Here to view the debate.