The US Embargo on Cuba: A Long Lasting Deadlock

When US President Kennedy first imposed trade restrictions on Cuba in 1960 – later extended to a full embargo in 1962 – the island was just subject to one of many consequences of the bilateral confrontation between the West and the Soviet Union. It arguably then made sense to ban Castro’s regime from the benefits of trading with the largest economy in the world, hoping that shortage and inflation would soon bring to an end the socialist government that was threatening America at its doorstep. However, this month will mark the fifty-second anniversary of the full embargo on Cuba and while the USSR did not make it to the twenty first century, the Castro brothers are still in power. The loss of the Soviet Union as a trade partner and an ally damaged its economy, but Cuba is still present on the international scene and counts on many trading partners. While the US administration normalized relations with former Cold War enemies such as China, what are the possible reasons behind the continued embargo on Cuba?

Former US President George W. Bush justified it as a ‘moral statement’^[i]. But while the undemocratic nature of the Cuban regime cannot be contested, the United States administration is trading with authoritarian countries such as Saudi Arabia and China, which both hold much higher records of Human-Rights abuses. “Trade creates the habits of freedom”, which “begin to create the expectations of democracy and demands for better democratic institutions. Societies that are open to commerce across their borders are more open to democracy within their borders”, said President Bush in an attempt to justify trade with the Middle East and China. This is a perfect illustration of the American hypocrisy with regards to the economic restrictions imposed on the island. If the US had sustained trade with Cuba, its exposure to freedom and liberalism could have arguably created a strong democratic movement among the population that could have paved the way for reform, like it was the case in Franco’s Spain after the bilateral trade agreement in 1953. In fact, the embargo serves as an excuse for the Castro administration, which blames the precarious economic situation in the island on the harsh American sanctions. The consequent anti-Americanism amongst Cubans when confronted to shortages arguably reinforces the appeal of the socialist model of the Castro brothers.

The Florida electorate is key to understanding this relationship, as it is composed of a significant Cuban American percentage and impacts the outcome of presidential elections, as well as the legislation passed by Congress concerning Cuba.  Generations of Cuban Americans, who fled their home country to escape the socialist reforms, resent the 1959 revolution and want to punish Castro. Some members of the American Senate opposing the reforming of the embargo are also Cuban Americans themselves such as Marco Rubio and Bob Menendez. Similarly, the Congress chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and House Appropriations Committee member Mario Diaz-Balart remain remarkably influential figures. They fear that lifting restrictions on Cuba would just benefit Raúl and Fidel Castro personally and strengthen their regime as most industries are controlled by the state. The possible end of the American embargo also represents an economic concerns for the sugar growers of Florida, who that fear a flow of cheap Cuban sugar to the US market who destabilize the prices.

The end of the embargo would however benefit both countries economically. Estimations show that the American economy lost up to $1.2 billion annually from the trade restrictions on the island and that lifting them could create nearly 6,000 jobs in the United States^[iii]. The American Chamber of Commerce has, for that matter, been one of the strongest advocates of a reform and the Texas Senate has voted in favour of a complete abolition of the embargo as Cuba’s oil output increased by 400% over a decade^[iv]. In 2000, there was, nonetheless, a relaxing of the restriction with the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act allowing cash only sales of US farm products and medical supplies, which resulted American crop sales to Cuba amounting to $250 million during the following year^[v]. In 2005, Cuba ranked 25th among the world’s biggest purchasers of American farm products and fifth in Latin America (higher than Brazil)^[vi].

President Obama deepened the lifting of some aspects of the restrictions on Cuba initiated by the Act of 2000 by relaxing the travel policies in 2009. A change of demographics in the swing state of Florida could allow more change to be forthcoming. Cuban American refugees are little by little being outnumbered by Cuban economic migrants, who feel less bitterly about Castro’s policies and are more eager to travel and send money freely back to their home country. Many expect further consistent policies to be introduced since President Obama will not be running for the next elections and therefore is not concern with the contentment level of Florida’s electorate, even though he seems reluctant to experience yet another altercation with the Republicans. Additionally, his Cuban counterpart Raul Castro, who took over the presidency from his brother Fidel in 2008, seems little inclined to negotiate issues that could stand in the way of an improvement of the bilateral relations, such as the imprisonment of Alan Gross, an American national who was sentenced to 15 years in jail in 2011. The political deadlock should nonetheless be overcome to end what Peter Kornblush called ‘the longest lasting failure in US foreign policy history’^[vii]. Last October, the United Nations voted for the 22nd year in a row in favour of the end of the US embargo on Cuba by 188 to 2 (only the US and Israel unsurprisingly voted against it), and the restrictions on a natural trading partner only 145km away from the American coasts have lost its raison d’être.

Originally published in KCL Dialogue, Spring 2014.

---

^[i] Bruce M Sabin, ‘American Trade with Cuba: An analysis of the current embargo and its future’, http://www.brucesabin.com/american_embargo_cuba.html, accessed on 07/02/2014.

^[ii] IBID.

^[iii] Austin Tymins, ‘Reexamining the Cuban Embargo’, Harvard Political Review,13/11/2013, http://harvardpolitics.com/world/reexamining-cuban-embargo/

^[iv] Bruce M Sabin, ‘American Trade with Cuba: An analysis of the current embargo and its future’, http://www.brucesabin.com/american_embargo_cuba.html, accessed on 07/02/2014.

^[v] IBID.

^[vi] Daniel Griswold, ‘Four Decades of Failure: The U.S. Embargo against Cuba’, Speech at the James A. Baker III Institute Program, 12/10/2005, CATO Institute, http://www.cato.org/publications/speeches/four-decades-failure-us-embargo-against-cuba accessed on 05/02/2014.

^[vii] quoted in Al Jazeera, ‘What is the future of US-Cuban relations?’, Inside Story Americas, 14/11/2012,http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2012/11/2012111484331911488.html.