The proper response to Kinzer

Stephen Kinzer writes in the Guardian Unlimited that "the next American president should offer to lift [the U.S. economic embargo of Cuba] as part of a broader accord that could pave the way for transition to a new era in Cuba..." Mr. Kinzer calls the embargo "a dumb idea, " "unsuccessful" and "counterproductive." He indicates that the embargo has provided Fidel Castro with a scapegoat, "by giving him a powerful enemy on whom to blame the country's problems." My problem with Mr. Kinzer's statements is that, like his claim that pandering to Cuban exiles by politicians during election periods is a "distasteful but familiar vice," his commentary is also distasteful and a very familiar vice. Distasteful in that his tone of reproach of Cuban exiles for espousing the cause of a free and democratic Cuba (and yes---whether Mr. Kinzer or anyone else likes it or not---a free and democratic Cuba where Cuban-Americans can also participate in a peaceful transition and rightfully so) is boring and cliche. Familar in that like most critics of the U.S. embargo against Cuba, Mr. Kinzer calls for dramatic change in long-standing U.S. policy without offering any credible indication of how a reversal of 47 years of policy and direct access to commerce with the United States will result in the new era he speaks of. Mr. Kinzer is certainly aware that Cuba enjoys and has long enjoyed normal diplomatic and economic relations with most other countries in the world and that these relations have done nothing to foster political transition in the country.

Take Mr. Kinzer's "happier" and "nightmare" scenarios, for example. Jubilation erupts in Miami, the next American president demands a regime change and somehow that results in the eruption of violence in Cuba. I agree with Mr. Kinzer that any sort of eruption of violence in Cuba, prompted by U.S. foreign policy or not, would be a nightmare. But, if Mr. Kinzer's argument is that the next American president should lift the embargo because violence in Cuba is certain to erupt if Cuban exiles are allowed to celebrate the death of Castro and the U.S. government, joining the long list of governments across the globe, once again calls for a regume change in Cuba, that is simply a pretty weak argument. With respect to his "happier" scenario where American leaders open talks with Cuba next year, assure them that the U.S. wants to avoid instability in Cuba, and agree to lift the embargo as part of a process of "thawing relations" with Cuba, I ask Mr. Kinzer "happier for whom?" Happier for the Cuban government which would be the major beneficiary of U.S. investments on the island. Happier for the U.S. agribusiness sector and other U.S. interests who will stand to benefit from the opening of commerce. Happier for U.S. tourists who can enjoy Cuba's beautiful beaches and hotels, beaches Cubans have only recently been allowed to enjoy by their own government and hotels the average Cuban earning a monthly salary from the Cuban government will never afford. Certainly not happier for the Cuban people whose standard of living is not likely to improve and who will continue to lack the basic freedoms their government denies them. A "nightmare" scenario is one where U.S. companies are sitting across the table from Raul Castro, entering into joint ventures with the Cuban government, while political prisoners continue to languish in Cuba's jails and the Cuban government continues its repressive tactics against the populace. Mr. Kinzer's statement that the lifting of the embargo "would allow democratic forces within Cuba to emerge and play a role in their country's future" is illusory without further justification. Mr. Kinzer is surely aware that harassment, beatings and imprisonment of dissidents and independent journalists on the island of Cuba continue today and that both Fidel Castro and Raul Castro have repeatedly indicated that they would never negotiate improved diplomatic or economic relations with the United States based on any conditions requiring changes in their policies. Indeed, the true "nightmare" scenario is one where Raul Castro finally has direct access to U.S. capital while continuing to repress the opposition and any political liberalization forces on the island.

I agree with Mr. Kinzer that we may have a unique opportunity in the near future with the passing of Fidel Castro to finally see some change in Cuba. I am also appreciative of the fact that in light of this potential opportunity a forward-looking dialogue with respect to U.S. foreign policy towards Cuba needs to take place. However, if the goal is a free and democratic Cuba, logic dictates that the lifting of the embargo without pre-conditions, which Mr. Kinzer and others support, would produce just the opposite result---solidification of the Castro dictatorship.