The Miami Herald
Wednesday, November 1, 2000
End the Embargo and Help Both Countries
The embargo's effect has been to strengthen Cubans' support of the dictatorship.
By Richard D. McCormick
When President John F. Kennedy expanded the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba, our island neighbor was getting ready to welcome the installation of Soviet missiles -- aimed at us. But that was almost 40 years ago.
Today, the missiles are long gone. So is the Soviet Union. The Cold War is over. And it's time for the embargo to end, too. As soon as our next president moves into the White House, he should begin some quiet diplomacy to see if there's a possibility of reestablishing diplomatic and trade relations with the Cuban government.
He will have a lot of work to do -- here at home, but also in Havana. Nobody knows if the Castro government is even willing to talk seriously. But if it is, the president's goal should be the end of all U.S. trade sanctions against Cuba and to begin a trading relationship that could lead eventually to the resolution of most of the issues that separate us (including confiscated property).
A new start would benefit the Cuban people, of course, but also the American people. And it would help the spread of prosperity and democracy in the Western Hemisphere. Mine is more than an armchair view; I was in Havana last week and saw how counterproductive the embargo is.
Certainly there are limited supplies of goods and of wealth. And certainly the embargo is a factor. But because it's a U.S.-only embargo, there is no absence of international trade. Canada, France and others are happy to supply many of the products that we do not.
The shortages are more a factor of 40 years of Communist central planning and the rule of dictatorship rather than law, which creates an uncertain environment for business investment. Meanwhile, the U.S. embargo's primary effect has been to strengthen Cubans' support of their dictatorship and to solidify their dislike of the U.S.
Those feelings were fanned by the Cuban government last week, after the U.S. Senate voted to lift the sanctions on food and medicine -- but at the same time made such trade impossible by banning the use of U.S. government or commercial credit. For cash-strapped Cuba, the ban on credit amounts to a ban on trade. And thousands of Cubans joined a government-orchestrated march in the streets.
Travel restrictions
Last week's legislation also put tighter restrictions on U.S. citizens' travel to Cuba, hurting both nations' economies. More important: The travel restrictions limit opportunities for our people to meet and talk, face-to-face. As I watched the Cuban protesters from my Havana hotel room, it struck me as strange that both the United States and Cuba would continue to hurt their economies and their people, to stubbornly pursue old political grudges.
The United States has opened trade relations with China, Vietnam and others with whom we disagree. Last week, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was in North Korea, exploring improved relations there. Yet we still avoid engagement with a country just 90 miles away, with whom we have a lot more shared history.
Ironically, my visit to Cuba last week was as a U.S. businessman and as vice president of the International Chamber of Commerce -- but also in support of beginning a process to end to the embargo. The ICC was holding its first-ever regional meeting in Cuba.
The topics on our agenda were not embargoes. They were the investment climate throughout the region, the opportunities created by electronic commerce, the growth and importance of business arbitration in Latin America, increasing trade in services and tools the ICC offers its members -- who include more than 7,000 small and large companies in 134 countries around the world.
The ICC has observed, time and again, that economic sanctions, especially unilateral ones, are a very poor instrument for achieving political objectives. In the case of the United States and Cuba, unilateral sanctions converted a problem between the free world and Cuba into a problem between the United States and its allies.
It is time to solve that problem and to open a major new market for U.S. goods and services. An economic thaw with Cuba would immediately open an estimated $450 million market for U.S. farm products, as well as an important new market for U.S. consumer goods, machinery, pharmaceuticals and medical equipment, travel and tourism and a long list of other products and services.
Right direction
The recent Senate vote was an important first step. It showed a changing sentiment in Congress. And we can hope that at least some food and medicine will move from the U.S. to Cuba. Beyond that, I hope both governments will seriously consider, and begin to explore, rebuilding a diplomatic and trading relationship that could serve, very well, the people of both nations.
The author, from Denver, is vice president of the International Chamber of Commerce and former chairman and CEO of US WEST Inc. He is also chairman of the U.S. Council for International Business.
