POL214 op-ed: Obama's moves with Cuba

President Obama’s move to normalize relations with Cuba ignores the advice of Cuban-American Congress members that further engagement will be more harmful than helpful. Discussions of funding for a US Embassy in Havana continue to spark controversy in Congress.

Alan Gross’s release gave the Obama administration too much false hope. Gross’s imprisonment shows the vulnerability of both the Cuban people and American visitors, shielded under Castro’s anti-democratic constraints. It demonstrates the long-standing lack of free speech and political opposition in Cuba, and a government that is unprepared to handle additional concessions.

Loosening economic policy towards Cuba derives from the impression that more money will mean more freedom for the Cuban people. However, this is not necessarily true. First, more money means additional funds for the Castro administration. This helps them cumulate power and damages the possibility of other political parties forming. Second, Castro’s government does not prioritize dialogue with Washington. Instead, the US providing concessions sends the message that Castro does not need to change his oppressive nature. This leads to a third point, that the movement towards economic engagement shows weakness. Keep doing what you are doing and eventually, the US will give in. Is this a safe message to send to ISIS?

Most baffling to me is the refusal to listen to the most informed members on the subject—Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), Senator Bob Mendez (D-NJ), and Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL). These are just 4 of the 7 Cuban-American Congressmen (and women) opposing further engagement with Cuba. This opposition comes from both the Democratic and Republican parties. Rubio and Ros-Lehtinen expressed their strong discontent with Obama unilaterally reversing US-Cuba foreign policy and emboldening the Castro regime.

Rubio responded to Obama’s State of the Union on US News, saying, “I don’t know of a single contemporary, reluctant tyranny that has become a democracy because of more trade and tourists. China is now the world’s richest tyranny, Vietnam continues to be a communist tyranny. And [Myanmar] Burma, even though they actually agreed to some democratic openings when the U.S. recognized them diplomatically, they have actually begun to take back a lot of those democratic openings.”

Cuba owes more than signs towards human rights and a less oppressive political culture. The Castro’s are accountable for $6 billion in assets seized from American citizens and businesses after the 1959 Cuban revolution. Those who agree with President Obama—that the embargo and current state of US-Cuba relations are outdated—fail to acknowledge recent acts and potential capabilities. If the country were ready for the embargo to be lifted, it would not have American prisoners until as recently as last month. It would not have a number of political prisoners still jailed for their anti-Castro sentiments. Let us not forgot the motivations behind upholding the embargo in Cuba: a communist, state-owned economy (still largely in place), previous cooperation with the Soviet Union, allowing missiles to nearly touch the Florida shore, and ties with Islamist tyrannies and other Latin American rogue states.

The relaxed travel restrictions to Cuba now make it seemingly easy to cross the border. Americans no longer have spending limitations during their visits and have permissible use of US credit and debit cards. However, there is too much uncertainty to allow such unrestricted travel and spending. With Gross’s release so recent, Obama cannot ensure that travelers will not be subject to the same consequences as Gross. Democratization is a long-term process, one to which Castro has not fully committed. Rather, American lives are at stake because of Obama’s obsession with being the popular kid at the international lunch table.

While it is difficult to confirm which solution will yield the most successful outcome for Cuba, Obama’s unilateral and rash thinking are most concerning. With 7 Cuban-Americans between the Senate and the House, representing both parties, it is unimaginable that Obama overlooks their opinions and expertise.  These are the members with the most relevant insight and first-hand knowledge. Hopefully the democratic process will triumph, and propping up embassies in Havana or loosening the embargo will not happen during this unfitting time.

Engaging with Castro and providing unwarranted concessions is a symbol that America will eventually submit to the most stubborn, anti-democratic nations. Conceding to Cuba’s long-standing oppressors has weakened the US’s international position and has damaged the hopes of political protesters in Cuba. If Obama would consider the voices of his fellow Cuban politicians, maybe he would recognize the issue.