Time To Rethink Relationship With Cuba

By: Greg Pivarnik

Posted: 9/10/07

Fidel Castro, whose health has vastly deteriorated over the past year, forcing him to transfer leadership of Cuba to his brother, has still found time to comment on the politics of the world. Recently in Granma, Cuba's Communist Party newspaper, he commented that a Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama ticket would be unstoppable in the 2008 election. However, Castro does not offer his full support because, as he puts it, "Both of them feel the sacred duty of demanding a democratic government in Cuba." Though Castro is a dictator whose past transgressions against his own people are numerous, he does have a legitimate gripe with official U.S. policy towards his country. There is no reason that an embargo towards Cuba should continue and the U.S., in order to stay consistent with its policies towards other regimes, should end its pettiness and open up trade and travel lanes with one of its closest neighbors.

Since the beginning of the Cold War Era there has been hostilities between the U.S. and Cuba. Events that took place in the late 50s and early 60s did nothing to soften the relationship. The notoriously blundered Bay of Pigs Invasion, orchestrated at the time by President John F. Kennedy and the CIA, was an act of aggression that Castro would not soon forget. Conversely, Castro tried to lend a home to Soviet weapons a few hundred miles from the Florida coast leading to the infamous Cuban missile crisis. Since then the U.S. has established an embargo against Cuba, mostly because of its communist ties, and has refused to budge on its position.

Ever since the embargo, established by President Kennedy on Feb. 7, 1962, it has seemed to be the inherited position of all politicians to renounce the Castro government and fully support this misguided policy. Either they are just stupid and refuse to think logically, or are they are just blind to the hypocrisies of the government for which they work.

One country that the U.S. has lucrative ties with is China. To understand why the policy against Cuba is outdated and arbitrary, it is necessary to examine the relationship the U.S. has with one of communism's only remaining superpowers. That being stated, this is not the only country the U.S. has supported that does not view the ideal government as democratic. In the late 80s and early 90s, the U.S. supported Saddam Hussein's Iraq regime until he decided to threaten our oil interests by invading Kuwait. The U.S. trained and supplied weapons to Tailban fighters in the mid 80s to help fight off the Russians. There was also the support of Manuel Noriega, a brutal dictator of Panama during the 80s, until the U.S. decided the War on Drugs was more important and prosecuted him for cocaine trafficking. The U.S. presently considers Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf an ally in the War on Terror. This behavior is indicative of the hypocrisy not just towards Cuba, but also the goal of attaining democracy in Iraq. Apparently democracy is only necessary when it is convenient to U.S. interests.

However, the ties with China - especially the economic ones - shine brightest on the world stage. With over a billion people and a cheap labor force, China has become one of the largest trading partners with the United States. This has happened despite the fact that they are not only communist like Castro's Cuba, but that they also have a general disdain for human rights. When it comes down to it though, the U.S., with its own abysmal human rights record, bases its decisions on the almighty dollar. Cuba has nothing to offer, so they can be abused.

We frequently ignore China's massive human rights violations at the expense of our economic well-being. Amnesty International statistics estimate that China executed between 7,500 and 8,000 people last year alone. Most recently, this past summer, China executed the head of its State Food and Drug Administration, Zheng Xiaoyu, for taking some $850,000 in bribes from drug companies. Granted, 10 people did die and 80 more were sickened from the availability of faulty drugs, but an execution is unusually harsh nonetheless. China often jails reporters and political figures who oppose the communist government's views on issues. The U.S. has also been treading water with respect to the Darfur genocide as it relates to China. The U.S. has been hesitant to come out and criticize the Chinese, who have a large stake in Sudan's oil, for supporting the region economically. If Castro was pulling a stunt like this, it may be grounds for invasion.

In a morally perfect world, the pertinent decision would be to stop trade relationships with China until they clean up their act. However, given the billions of dollars that change hands between the two countries every year, this would be extremely hard to convince people of. There is also the need to acknowledge the necessity of a healthy economy for the citizens of the U.S., of which China is a big part, through their cheap labor and exports. With all these premises, the only logical and fair decision is to lift all economic sanctions against Cuba. They no longer pose a threat, and the economic stability would only benefit the people, while the sanctions only benefit those in power. After all, if we can constantly forgive China for their human rights transgressions and their communist way of life, there is no reason Castro cannot be extended the same hand.

Weekly Columnist Greg Pivarnik is a 7th-semester molecular and cell biology major. He can be contacted at Gregory.Pivarnik@UConn.edu