On the Silliness of the Cuban Embargo

Two years after I was born, the Soviet Union hit its final nadir. The former Evil Empire collapsed under the weight of its own economic contradictions, never to recover its original form. The fall was the greatest victory for liberty in a century. The beast was dead, and some naïve scholars thought the fall of communism actually meant history was coming to an end.

I missed it all. By the time the Soviet menace slinked away into the night, I was the wee age of four. I don’t have any recollection of the tense time when nuclear war seemed imminent. I don’t have any knowledge of the Cuban Missile Crisis outside of written accounts. Today, Russia seems like another foreign country with a rich culture that is bogged down by a corrupt but imperially ambitious government. It seems held together with an alarming, if not interesting, mix of nationalism and authoritarianism. The communism that once posed a threat to the West from its home in Moscow no longer exists outside of college campuses. For American millennials such as myself, Russian power may as well be ancient Greek mythology.

From that view, the outrage over President Obama’s proposed easing of tensions with Cuba seems ridiculously overblown. Following the president’s announcement that diplomatic ties will be restored - including the reestablishment of an embassy in Havana, relaxing of import restrictions, the freeing of several political prisoners including one American, and the release of three Cuban spies - several Republican lawmakers vigorously attacked the decision. I fail to see the point of their anger.

Cuba, a rinky-dink island off the coast of Florida that hasn’t seen a new automobile within its borders in 50 years, is not a threat to the United States. The country no longer serves as a Soviet satellite. It’s not exporting the violent revolutionary theories of Marx. Cuba is one of the last holdouts of repressive collectivist regimes that are characterized by a few elites profiting off the back of the plundered masses.

So what’s the big deal with opening up U.S. trade with a nation in close vicinity that is unfortunately run by despotic thugs? Doesn’t free trade lift all boats, rich and poor? Didn’t someone once wisely observe that if goods don’t cross borders, tanks will?

Florida Senator and son of Cuban immigrants Marco Rubio has been the most outspoken Republican criticizing Obama’s proposal. On the Sunday morning talk circuit, he chastised the diplomatic change in direction because “it won’t lead to freedom and liberty for the Cuban people.” Several lawmakers since joined Sen. Rubio in denouncing the policy change. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie called the deal “awful” and “typical of this president.”

These saber rattlers seriously believe that a policy of antagonization inspires regime change. If that were so, a half-century of sanctions would have inspired a democratic turnover by now. Instead, Cuba is poorer than ever and struggling to get by. How does Marco Rubio not see this? How can his Republican colleagues be so immune to basic logic? Economic isolation has done nothing to change the inner politics of Cuba. It has only aroused anti-American sentiment among residents who can blame the U.S. for their destitution instead of the communist-inspired public policy that destroys economic initiative.

One bright spot among perturbed Republicans was Kentucky Senator Rand Paul. The Senate’s libertarian standard bearer was hopeful about the president’s plan to cool tensions with Cuba. Speaking on a radio program, Sen. Paul declared the current embargo “just hasn’t worked.” He went on to say, “If the goal is regime change, it sure doesn’t seem to be working, and probably, it punishes the people more than the regime because the regime can blame the embargo for hardship.” In a separate interview, he broadened his position, saying that the Castros - Fidel Castro and his brother-in-charge Raul - should not remain in power and that the easing of sanctions should have come with promise of open elections. He also made sure to point out that the various iterations of the Cuban embargo were passed by Congress and must be undone by the legislative body to have any legitimacy.

Not all conservatives agreed with the Paulian sentiment. Many wanted more reciprocations from Cuba in return for opening up trade. Hardliners wanted no deal unless the Castros voluntarily removed themselves from power. How exactly they planned to reach such a goal without violent intervention, these Republican armchair generals never say.

The demand for freedom is nice, but the view that democratic liberty is the only worthwhile goal of easing sanctions is short-sighted. Freedom and private property aren’t things that are adopted overnight. They require a change in culture and behavior. The first step in transforming a society into a more liveable, more peaceful place is to ease unneeded suffering. Current restrictions on trade deprive the normal citizenry of valuable goods and services. Government leaders are affected, but not nearly to the degree that the average working person is.

For this reason alone, the embargo should be fully lifted on Cuba. At least a generation has gone by without being stirred into revolutionary fervor over the American embargo. Why not free up the barriers to trade in hope of establishing goodwill among the people who suffer the most under communism’s sickening philosophy?

Some conservative hawks are worried that the easing of sanctions will provide much needed relief for Cuba’s authoritarian government and preserve the influence of communism in the rest of South America. R.R. Reno points out that communism’s allure is no longer enticing in much of Latin America. What goes for societal collectivism in Venezuela these days is actually “the vocabulary of economic populism, not a plan for ushering in a workers’ paradise.” It’s hard to see who will be emboldened with the opening of trade with Cuba. Certainly a the working class utopia that can’t feed itself or have enough toilet paper to meet basic sanitary requirements.

Rarely does President Obama propose anything that is conducive to liberty or economic prosperity. The relaxing of tensions with Cuba is one of the few times we have seen this president propose something of genuine charity that would help actual victims of governmental oppression. Hawkish Republicans can grandstand all they want on the issue. They are likely only posturing in the build-up to the next presidential race. Those who do so on the backs of the many held down by communism’s pernicious system of exploitation will have plenty to answer for when primary season rolls around. As Reno says, “The Cold War is over.” It’s time to move on. And that means ditching the harmful Cuba embargo that has done little to deter the despotic Castro regime. Give the people the taste of what freedom can build. Let them decide their fate from there.