Introductory Remarks to Panel 1: Policy Implications

July 15, 2003
U.S. Senator Max Baucus (D-MT)

Thank you very much. I appreciate that very much. As you already know, this is pretty important. I'm glad that you're all here today, you're help to participate in this conference and move the ball here. I also deeply appreciate the efforts of Senator Mike Enzi and Representative Flake. They've already outlined some of the context and some of the implications of some of the restrictions on travel of the current travel ban to Cuba, and it's my hope, I'm very heartened frankly, by the enthusiastic turnout here. We're gonna make something happen, that is we're not gonna just talk about the problem, but we're actually going to, together, do something about it. I can't thank you enough for your participation.

Beneath the panel discussions this morning, though, stirs an even more basic question, and that is a question that drives our debate over the policy on Cuba. Namely, how do we bring peace, how do we bring prosperity, to the Cuban people? Lifting the travel ban is only the start.

Taking actions like lifting the travel ban, we have to keep our eye on what we're really all about here, and lifting the travel ban will just be a part of it. That's really what this debate is about. The way that we settle this question has deep policy implications. The way that we view our role as Americans with a free and open society in a world where political and social repression is not uncommon. Virtually everyone in both sides of debate shares the same desire, that is to bring peace and prosperity to Cuba. The only question is how.

Answers to that question are diverse, and varied, it's complex. There are as many different opinions in this room as there are people in this room. But one thing is clear, and that is the current policy is a total failure. The regime in Cuba has been amazingly resilient. It has survived thirty years of the Cold War, it's survived the end of Cold War, the fall of its primary benefactor, the Soviet Union, and it's survived another twelve years completely on its own. It's amazing. All of us who visited Cuba get that sense of just the indestructibility it seems, partly because of, not entirely because of, the presence of - the domineering presence of - Fidel Castro. It's survived for a long time, it's been resilient.

But while the rest of world enters the 21st century, and while the global economy enters a new era of independence, the Cuban island remains isolated. It's as if the country is in a time warp. The politics of the country are the same as they were when Castro took control. Despite the US embargo and travel ban, the Castro regime appears as entrenched as ever.

The despicable crackdown on dissidents this Spring exposed the truth of the regime to everyone. There's no debate about the evils of the Cuban government. There never really was. I don't think a single panelist or member of Congress here today has supported engagement with Cuba because they agreed with Cuba's oppressive government. To the contrary, those of us who support engagement do so because we believe it is the most effective and peaceful way to bring about democratic change for the Cuban people. It's very analogous to my efforts, not too many years past, to United States foreign policy to engage with China. I believe that engagement is usually much more effective than non-engagement. We talk to our friends, we ought to also talk to those who are not our friends. The more we talk the more we minimize misunderstandings. The more we tend to see possibilities for a very constructive partnership.

Engagement, I think, is critical. After four decades of futility, I think it's time to question very seriously whether the embargo has any chance of achieving our goals of peace and opportunity for the Cuban people. Yet surprisingly, the crackdown struck many people as an occasion to rise behind the embargo, rather than reconsider it. The administration's response has been to strengthen the embargo and reduce opportunities for contact with the Cuban people. I think that's exactly the wrong response.

If anything, the crackdown proved to me that the gulf between the Cuban people and democracy is as wide as it's ever been. And now not coincidentally, the gulf that prevents contact between the Cuban and the American people seems to be growing. If you truly want to bring democratic change to Cuba, if we really want to do that, if we really want peace and prosperity for the Cuban people, then we have to rise above the politics of this issue and pursue a policy that gives them that opportunity.

[In September] I once again will travel to Cuba, to see first hand how the people and the economy, are faring. Trips such as these are vital to maintaining a line of communication between our citizens. Unfortunately, because of decisions within the administration to decline requests for travel, fewer and fewer trips are possible. Now, more than ever, all of us need to take a close look at the travel restrictions.

I urge you to contact every Senator, every Representative, ask for their support, ask for their support for the travel bill which is now pending in each chamber. In the Senate we've introduced S-590, the Freedom to Travel to Cuba Act of 2003, we have 24 co-sponsors so far and I know we can get more. I urge you to be pretty persistent frankly, when you're talking to various Senators and House members. Try to see the members, and impress upon them that frankly they're the employees, you're all the employers. And, it's the old thing about being firm, being courteous with persistence, and stick with it, that does, from my experience, make a difference. And beyond that is following, in addition to seeing members of the House and Senate, and some of their top staff today and in the next couple of days, it's imperative that when you go back home, that you get on the telephone and mark down your calendar about every second week, and call that member of Congress. I guarantee you, that when that member of Congress gets that call again from you, the second, third, and fourth time, that he or she is gonna jump.

I'm lucky. I come from a state with only 900,000 people. I take all telephone calls from all Montana - I don't care who they are, that's just my policy. Now if I can do that in Montana, certainly every other member of Congress can do the same. I'm not gonna make many friends here am I? (Laughter) But it's true, every member of Congress can do the same, because they don't have 900,000 people. A lot of Senators are in the position to do so to. So be persistent with those follow up telephone calls, it does make a difference, Congress does listen when you the employers come in large numbers and tell us what we should be doing.

This is a great issue, it's a lot of fun to be on the right side of the issue. I feel the right side is what we're doing. Maybe a few in the room don't share the same opinion, but that's great too. That's America. We've got a lot ahead of us, a great opportunity, and I thank you all for what you're doing. I thank the panelists too. Thank you, I really appreciate it.

[End transcript]