Introductory Remarks to Panel 3: Benefits of Engagement

July 15, 2003
U.S. Senator Larry Craig

For over 40 years the U.S. government has placed an embargo on Cuba and prohibited Americans from traveling to the island. Without question, these measures were taken to force Castro and Cuba to change its policies. Forty years later, the lack of US engagement has finally run its course and it is time to pursue another strategy to end this horrific regime.

Today, no one questions that Castro remains defiant and is still committing human rights violations as we speak. It is strange, in light of Castro’s recent crackdown on dissidents, that the U.S. government further tightened its restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba. We should be asking why we are running from a fight and not placing trust and encouragement in the American people.

Since we are beginning to realize that nothing has been on the negotiating table with Cuba for 40 years, I find it hard to believe that further limiting Americans from traveling to Cuba will likely force Castro to change any of his policies. As a matter of fact, in recent years I have seen many in Congress begin to express these same feelings – and this has been demonstrated by the increase in support over the years to end the travel ban.

Why should we end the travel ban? Because the benefits of engagement are limitless. To demonstrate this all we need to do is look at our past successes. For example, when confronted with the threat of China, the United States decided to engage through trade and contact instead of limiting the best salespeople of democracy, Americans themselves, from traveling to China. Today we are now reaping the benefits of that engagement, politically and economically. Similarly, there is political and economic potential for both Cubans and Americans if we were to engage Cuba.

In addition to our policy toward China, we must not forget our engagement with the former Soviet Union and now Russia. Without question, our active in engagement with China and the Soviet Union brought about tremendous changes in these communist countries – one of which has dropped its communist title.

Today, because of that engagement, we are seeing results and reforms taking place in China and Russia. Their borders are more open to trade, and American businesses now have more markets to do business in. More important however, is the fact that Americans are now in direct contact with people in these countries – exchanging ideas and philosophies. It is this contact that deserves the credit for reforms overseas – not necessarily because of the products we are selling.

Recently, several Idahoans experts in the writings and life of Ernest Hemmingway were scheduled to attend an International Ernest Hemmingway Conference in Cuba to exchange ideas with Cuban experts and experts from throughout the world. As you may know, Ernest Hemmingway spent a great deal of his life at one of his homes in Sun Valley, Idaho – and many Idahoans have shown a great interest in his life. What a great opportunity this was for academics to share an interest in a common subject and forge relationships; relationships which had the opportunity to spill over into other areas.

These experts from Idaho were professors from the University of Idaho, and a few were business professionals who were actively involved with preserving Hemmingway artifacts, literature, and his home in Idaho. In years past, these academic professionals have been allowed to travel to Cuba on a permit. However, recently they were denied a new permit. Effectively, the denial of this permit and other permits is preventing Americans from explaining and showcasing our beliefs in democracy and capitalism with influential Cubans. These actions – no doubt – are in stark contrast with our actions taken with regards to countries like China and Russia.

Many may ask why a conservative Republican is pushing for engagement with a Communist country. I am one of many in Congress who have taken note of the fact that our restrictions for the past 40 years have done little to bring about change in Cuba, while the recent success of our trade engagement throughout the world is beginning to pay dividends.

Since Castro has not changed – there was never anything on the negotiating table to begin with – we have a couple options: continue sitting idle or bomb Cuba – not with ordnance but with policies of engagement and Sears catalogues. I prefer the later because I believe those who travel to Cuba, the U.S. business industry, our professional academics, and the American tourist can and will make a difference in Cuba. Let’s put faith in capitalism, philosophy and the American people – not restrictions which are having no effect.