Cuba Sanctions
Dan Drezner, a legitimate expert on the subject of economic sanctions, has a post on the topic concluding that a policy of "engagement" is unlikely to work any better than the current policy of embargo. That seems reasonable insofar as we define "work" simply to mean "cause the regime to topple." But there are large general benefits to not sanctioning countries -- it makes the local population more prosperous and opens up tourism and business opportunities for Americans.
Generally speaking, there should be -- and in practice is -- a strong presumption against imposing sanctions on countries, even countries run by nasty dictators. It only makes sense to do sanctions if you think there's a very strong possibility of them working. When that's not the case -- as it pretty clearly isn't in the case of Cuba -- there are very good reasons to prefer engagement even if that doesn't "work" either.












In my opinion every country in the world deserves the right to have a government of their chosing. Furthermore, no country in the world is required to chose a government that meets US approval. Cuba has a government that it seems obvious that Cubans by and large want. Cuba is not threatening our country in any way, nor is it mistreating vast numbers of its citizens.
So, I'm perfectly happy to let Cuba keep its government, be it Communist or whatever. Given that, why would I want to see America continue to apply sanctions to Cuba? It makes no sense to me to decide that based on what is best for our country - it isn't our country that is at issue.
I don't buy the argument that exporting democracy is our noble cause today. First of all, we aren't doing that. We are attempting to get US business friendly governments in nations where US businessmen can make megadollars. Whether those governments are democracies or dictatorships is of no interest to our government. So, I see nothing whatever to justify continued sanctions against Cuba.
Hoppy in Sacramento
August 5, 2006 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am generally dubious of the notion that countries which have governments that their citizens by and large want, will have to rely on secret police, keep large numbers of political prisoners in jail, outlaw opposition parties, and have people fleeing the country in makeshift rafts.
You may believe that Cuba is a paradise if you wish. In my opinion, all it takes to refute that notion is to notice that people break the law to enter democracies, and break the law in order to leave dictatorships.
August 5, 2006 4:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
That said, I think there are arguments on both sides of the sanctions question. My general bias is against sanctions. However... Back when Cuba was being financed by the USSR, it was exporting revolution and military advisors all over the world. It's a sad fact that a prosperous Cuban citizenry implies a prosperous Cuban government, which will inevitably spend that money on evil ends.
August 5, 2006 4:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cuba has a government that it seems obvious that Cubans by and large want.
You are an idiot, a dupe, or both. I thought this kind of stupidity was largely a thing of the past, but sadly it appears not.
August 5, 2006 4:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only reasons we have sanctions against Cuba is the very powerful Cuban lobby in Florida. No one -- not democrats or republicans -- dare to cross them.
I agree with you that Cuban Cubans seem satisfied with an imperfect situation; they have universal health care, a good educational system, and a FAR better response to hurricanes than we have here.
They are an ISLAND, after all;
why -- if we can deal with China, hold hands with Shieks, and have diplomatic relations with benevolent dictators like the king of Jordan -- why can't we normalize relations with Cuba? It is just plain silly!
No, it's not a paradise. Guess what? Not too many people would want the "paradise" we have bestowed on Iraq. Who are we to tell other countries how to govern?
Hoppy, you said it all, and in less space than I did (as usual). Thanks
Jan Knaus
August 5, 2006 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am generally dubious of the notion that countries which have governments that their citizens by and large want, will have to rely on secret police, keep large numbers of political prisoners in jail, outlaw opposition parties, and have people fleeing the country in makeshift rafts.
I get the first part, and I agree, but I didn't know that any of our citizens were fleeing the Cheney administration on RAFTS!
OK, my point is that our government has taken a distinct turn off the road of righteousness, and we just don't hold the moral high ground any more (if we ever did). We used to lead by example. Now we lead by force, and using techniques that we formerly decried. We simply have no business forcing our fake morals on other countries.
We really need to fix our own sad state of affairs first, if it's not too late
Jan Knaus
August 5, 2006 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I promise you, HOMER, that Hoppy is no idiot, nor is he a dupe.
You need to get a little more experience here and learn that perjorative name-calling is out of place, and only makes the cuprit look like he needs a thesaurus, or a few years of maturity.
Also, read some of Hoppy's posts; if you still think he's an idiot, you're probably not going to be too happy here. His posts are respectful of others, and also deserve respect.
Jan Knaus
August 5, 2006 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I get where Matt is coming from, and largely agree here -- but I also have been forever scarred by watching Tiannemann Square live on CNN, and would prefer to be paying .05% more or whatever on various low-end manufactured goods from Thailand or Guatemala than from a China that is overrated as an "enemy/threat" by most but underrated by Matt. (b/c he relies on "per capita" econ analysis, which is REALLY bad when comparing rich & poor countries -- purchasing parity is far superior)
Additionally, I strongly support Taiwanese independence -- Formosans deserve tjeir democracy, rather than China's horrifying blend of Dickensian capitalism & old school autocracy.
blog.njdc.orgwww.njdc.org
August 5, 2006 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I get where Matt is coming from, and largely agree here -- but I also have been forever scarred by watching Tiannemann Square live on CNN, and would prefer to be paying .05% more or whatever on various low-end manufactured goods from Thailand or Guatemala than from a China that is overrated as an "enemy/threat" by most but underrated by Matt. (b/c he relies on "per capita" econ analysis, which is REALLY bad when comparing rich & poor countries -- purchasing parity is far superior)
Additionally, I strongly support Taiwanese independence -- Formosans deserve tjeir democracy, rather than China's horrifying blend of Dickensian capitalism & old school autocracy.
blog.njdc.orgwww.njdc.org
August 5, 2006 6:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Duplicate deleted
Jan Knaus
August 5, 2006 7:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only hope for sanctions to ever work is when there is a broad multinational consensus and compliance. Unilateral sanctions by the United States are just silly. Its like trying to enforce a naval blockade with a leaky rowboat. Our sanctions on Cuba do no harm to Cuba as long as the rest of the world does not join in and perhaps some good in that it provides a focus for Cuban nationalism and an excuse for poverty. Sanctions serve narrow domestic political purposes but serve no international policy purpose...except to make us look ridiculous.
August 5, 2006 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anybody seen what the Chinese are doing to pet dogs lately? There is a massacre of millions of dogs because of some cases of rabies. These are our pals. These are the people that are keeping our war expenses (not included in our budget, of course) afloat. These are the people that will come back to haunt us with our untenable debts.
Oh, well, at least we are keeping Cuba in its place. What a completely ignorant policy, and it is equally ignorant for democratic and republican administrations.
Warning: Don't let the neo-cons do the same thing with Venezuela. The DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED president is no friend of Bush, so don't let the hypocrisy rule!
Jan Knaus
August 5, 2006 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
FOREIGNID: 151336
FOREIGNPARENTID: 0
FOREIGNCOMMENTERID: 10373
AUTHOR: madison idea
DATE: 08/05/2006 07:13:46 PM
August 5, 2006 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank God that we, by contrast, live in a country which never imposes its ideas or its economy on any nation or people. I am glad that our military does not have advisors all over the world.
August 5, 2006 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to ask: Did Karl Rove send you here? I mean,
a prosperous Cuban citizenry implies a prosperous Cuban government, which will inevitably spend that money on evil ends.
Evil ends? Evil ends? Does a prosperous Oil/Armament (read Halliburton no-bid contracts) Industry (ala Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld, etc) imply a prosperous American government?
Ask the millions of Americans without health insurance, and little hope for their children getting job security or pension security if they feel prosperous.
Jan Knaus
August 5, 2006 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Compared to Castro, we'd be hard put not to hold the high ground. It's just that we're now looking down at him in that valley from the hillside, and not some higher peak.
We'd have to get out the tunneling equipment to meet him eye to eye.
August 5, 2006 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Question: Which of Cuba or the US holds more prisoners stuck in legal limbo?
The US by a long shot. Not even close.
Sadly, the US has nothing to teach Cuba on the human rights front.
Frankly, until a few years ago I didn't know I'd ever get to write such an outrageous sentence!
How low we've sunk.
August 5, 2006 10:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, BS! By that standard, first, the US has to come off worse than any small country, no matter how bad that country might be, just because you're comparing absolute numbers rather than percentages of the population, and we're really big.
Second, the Cuban government imprisons people for literally political offenses. Bush hasn't ordered the DLC jailed, last time I looked. Castro would in a heartbeat.
I'm not terribly thrilled about the detentions, or a lot of the victimless crimes that put people in jail, but actual political prisoners are quite thin on the ground here.
Man, a few of the comment here remind me of those loons who used to claim the Berlin wall was built to keep West Germans out of the People's Republic.
People break INTO the US, people break OUT OF Cuba, and that is all you really need to know, to understand our relative positions. We aren't any saints, but Castro sports horns and a tail.
August 6, 2006 6:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Question: Which of Cuba or the US holds more prisoners stuck in legal limbo?
Hey, do we get to count the political prisoners at Guantanamo Bay as Cuban prisoners? I mean, just, you know, to help our statistics?
Jan Knaus
August 6, 2006 11:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
OK, you just gave yourself away here, Karl R:
...Castro sports horns and a tail.
Why, may I ask, is it necessary to make everyone that this administration doesn't like into an evil devil? And as I asked above, why Castro and not autocratic rulers from say, oil-rich nations like Saudi Arabia, or our debt-holders like the Chinese? It all seems a little hypocritical to me.
Cuba is a little ISLAND! If we normalized relations with it, we would have FAR more influence over it than we do now. It is the Florida Cubans, who lust after power and property there that keep us from doing the sensible thing.
Jan Knaus
August 6, 2006 11:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
On the whole I agree we should drop the embargo; It would be about the best move we could make to subvert Castro's regime. All I said was that there were arguments on both sides.
But let's not pretend that Castro is a nice guy. He's a DICTATOR, ruling over a police state. East Germany with a moat instead of a wall.
Evil? Yeah, I think he's evil. Even if horns and a tail is just a metaphor.
August 6, 2006 12:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well actually, the United States has a higher proportion of its population in prison or jail on a per capita basis than any other country except for China.
August 6, 2006 12:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
CVille, we do not,
1. Have large numbers of political prisoners.
2.Rely on secret police to supress dissent.
3. Outlaw opposition parties.
Though I will grant you that "campaign reform" is reaching the point where it's getting perilously close to becoming a de facto version of #3, with respect to third parties.
What we've got here is something amazing: Failing to see the beam in another's eye because of the mote in our own. You know, we really don't have to pretend we're worse than everybody else, in order to start cleaning up at home. We can reform here, AND maintain a sense of perspective.
August 6, 2006 12:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now, THAT is true, and an ugly commentary on the war on drugs. But it's still the case that they're not political prisoners. Our government doesn't remain in power by virtue of jailing everybody who criticizes it.
Castro's government does.
And that really blows away the claim that Castro's regime is popular. Popular governments simply don't have to do that sort of thing.
August 6, 2006 12:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mnay years ago, former Rep. Pat Schroeder, then contemplating a run for President, suggested that we could regain some leverage with Cuba by installing a AAA baseball franchise in Havana. Made more sense than anything else I've heard.
August 6, 2006 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
People might argue that the US government remains in power by virtue of ignoring and marginalizing everyone who criticizes it. That's even more effective than jailing people (because it generates no blowback). The other part is the US electoral system, which is frighteningly effective at maintaining stability at the cost of common sense and progress.
August 6, 2006 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, if you want to regard a democracy where the "wrong" people win elections as tantamount to a dictatorship, I doubt I'm going to change your mind. Just don't expect many people to agree with you.
August 6, 2006 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's really an excellent idea, and really would go a long way towards the winning of hearts and minds that's so direly necessary. Unfortunately, I just can't think of many reasons for Cubans to feel positively towards the U.S. right now. The embargo combined with the lack of any non-ideological outreach to the Cuban people mean that the main image they get of the Americans is what Castro tells them in his speeches, backed up by the gruesome rituals that CNN International shows going on in the streets of Miami. Castro may be feared, but he is not much loathed, and the sight of people celebrating his death is truly savage, and surely complements the rhetoric about warlike imperialist Americans that they get from the state media quite nicely.
August 7, 2006 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I don't know about that. If you compare, for instance, the proportion of black males in prisons, in comparison to their representation in the general population. Factor in the number of blacks arrested or stopped by police for 'driving while black', subject to other forms of arrest or detention, comparative sentences given to blacks, and then the sorts of social sanctions (felon voting laws) which are applied...
Well, it do seem like the United States is covertly waging a war on black people.
I suspect the careful distinctions between political prisoners and other sorts of prisoners may start to get a little muddy.
Particularly since the American government has no compunctions about police state surveillance and auditing of people it dislikes.
August 7, 2006 10:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I regard this sort of reasoning as a libel against the majority of blacks, who somehow manage to stay out of prison by the simple expedient of refraining from committing felonies. Which says something about the minority who don't manage that utterly unimpressive feat, irrespective of my view that too many acts are felonies today.
Driving while black isn't responsible for the frighteningly high level of black on black homicide, for instance. It takes a pathological level of denial to pretend that high rates of black imprisonment aren't primarilly due to high rates of black crime.
And if we arbitrarilly set a cap on how many blacks we imprisoned, it would be their fellow blacks who suffered the predations of criminals left on the street.
Look, I've been subject to that surveillance you mention. I've attended protests, and seen police snipers stationed on rooftops around us. During the last admininstration several organizations I belong to were subject to those audits you complain so vaguely of. Explicitly political audits, proven in court to be at the direction of the White house. (I'm genuinely curious how common that sort of thing has been during THIS administration.) It was harassment, it was political, and it didn't put me, or any of my friends, in prison.
I'm asking for a sense of perspective here. Castro is a dictator, who runs a genuine, accept no substitutes, go straight to jail if you criticize him, police state, that people risk their lives to escape.
For all our sins, we're not in the same class as him. Not remotely.
August 7, 2006 1:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
The question isn't right vs. wrong. The question is whether the system is rigged in favor of certain kinds of people and interests. It's also not democracy vs. dictatorship, it's democracy vs. some other 'cracy'.
August 8, 2006 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink