Gabriel Hilfer Political Science 472 Should the United States maintain sanctions against Cuba? An interesting question arises while overlooking the current trade embargo enforced upon Cuba by the United States of America. Why does the United States maintain an embargo against Cuba, when CubaUs primary ally, and the U.S.U former adversary, the USSR, has fallen from world power? The answer to this question has many levels and probably cannot be answered fully at any of them. Many believe that the embargo has transformed from a political tool into a personal grudge against the Castro regime. Others feel that the trade embargo is a result of the powerful Cuban political lobbies which wield disproportional influence in the federal government. A second part of the question on why the United States continues the embargo, is what are the effects which this embargo is having upon Cuba, and is that what it is intended to do? A brief history of the trade embargo with Cuba will possibly give a clearer perception of present day policy. The United States originally imposed an embargo on trade with Cuba in 1962 when president Kennedy came to the conclusion that Cuba was on the verge of forming a totalitarian regime with the USSR .(DeVarona) By 1964 there was a continent wide embargo imposed against Cuba and the Castro regime for Rrepeated involvement in subversive acts of aggressionS against members of the Organization of American States (OAS).(DeVarona) By 1971 Castro had become less revolutionary and began to formally open conventional relations with Chile, Peru and Argentina. In response to pressures, the United States loosened its embargo policy, allowing U.S. subsidiaries in Latin America to export to Cuba products with 20% or less of U.S. made content. This compromise was reached in an OAS meeting in 1975.(DeVarona) Just as relations were beginning to improve with a thought to be reformed Cuba, Castro sent 40,000 troops to Angola in support of the Soviet military already stationed there. This was needless to say not looked upon favorably by the United States. In 1976 President Carter gave Cuba yet another chance. He initiated a process of rapprochement and eased the restriction on U.S. travel to Cuba. (DeVarona) Once again, these seemingly good intentions were undermined by CastroUs sending of 15,000 troops to Ethiopia, in addition to CastroUs reaffirmed support for evolution in Central America. As if this was not enough, Castro, in order to relieve political pressures at home, allowed 125,000 Cubans to flee to the United States. Amongst them were thousands of convicted criminals shipped directly from Cuban jails and hundreds of CubaUs mentally ill.(DeVarona) Upon the election of Ronald Reagan, the embargo was once again strengthened and enforced. Bill Clinton recently tightened up the trade embargo even further by ending the practice of foreign subsidiaries of U.S. companies trading with Cuba in dollar amounts totaling more than 700 million a year.(DeVarona) In 1992 the Cuban Democracy act was passed by congress Rciting CastroUs refusal to introduce democratic reforms and the increasing incidence of human rights violations.S RThe expressed objective of the CDA is to further isolate the Castro regime in order to weaken its repressive apparatus, and to increase pressure for democratic change on the island.S(DeVarona) The most current piece of legislature passed regarding the trade embargo with Cuba is the Helms Burton Act, passed in 1995. The specific stipulations of this particular piece of legislature are that it strengthens the current embargo by Rdenying totalitarian states access to loans, credits or financing for its bankrupt economy and consequently aims to limit CastroUs resources and powers.S(Bazbaz) The fall of the Soviet Union has meant hardship for most of those who live in Cuba. Without the reported 150 billion dollars that Cuba received over approximately thirty years from the Soviet Union alone, CubaUs poorly managed economy is without question, in trouble. Cubans who once enjoyed one of the highest standards of living in the hemisphere, are now accustomed to shortages on almost all products whether of necessity or luxury.(DeVarona) Rationing on items like soap are all to common to the Cuban people. This astronomical amount of aid that Cuba received does not even include an estimated one billion dollars a year Castro received from the Soviet Union for military assistance.(DeVarona) With such immense amounts of money at his fingertips, Rit is of little wonder why Castro perceived the U.S. embargo to be little more than an economic inconvenience.S(DeVarona) However today it is a different story because of the fall of the Soviet Union. Castro has been forced into a position where he must find other means of coming up with the ludicrous amount of money which was formerly subsidized by the U.S.S.R.. A main contention of the International communities opposition to CastroUs Cuba is the atrocious human rights violations which take place on the island nation. Since Castro has taken over, there have been more than 12,500 executions in addition to the thousands upon thousands of political prisoners who have been beaten and tortured. One of the most infamous Cuban methods of torture is the Rpunishment drawersS where one cannot stand upright nor sit down, in which prisoners are held for weeks at a time.(DeVarona) A main problem that the international community has with Castro, is the way he runs his totalitarian regime. Castro himself came to power approximately thirty five years ago and declared himself the Chief of State, President of the Republic, Leader of the Cuban revolution, and Commander in Chief of the Cuban armed forces.(DeVarona) These titles have never once been validated through a free general election. In 1992 Castro claimed to be giving the international community what it wanted by holding elections. This RelectionS consisted of candidates from only one party. The electoral law on the books in Cuba effectively excluded the inclusion of candidates not expressly approved by the communist party. In the case of both elections, Castro claimed that his party had received approximately ninety percent approval from the Cuban people.(DeVarona) Observers put this number somewhat closer to thirty percent. The elections were so badly fixed, that they drew charges of electoral fraud from around the world. The most notable comment was made by Russia, whoUs seven democratic parties issued a statement saying Rdespite the democratic camouflage, it cannot be denied that the elections had all the markings of a political farce.S(DeVarona) Castro's refusal to be legitimized by free elections makes him a dictator, no matter what he states officially. Castro refuses to even consider the possibility of losing one iota of power, and the process of free elections presents Castro directly with the threat of revocation of his supreme authority in Cuba. Cuba is also known to harbor and help train terrorists from around the world. Castro provides them with sanctuary, in addition to aiding these terrorists with arms and other resources. In fact Ras recently as January of 1994, over 1000 guerrilla leaders and Marxists from around the world answered CastroUs summons to Havana and agreed to help save this Tlast bastion against U.S. imperialismU by mobilizing international campaigns of solidarity against the U.S. embargo.S(DeVarona) The main intention of the United States embargo on Cuba is to isolate Cuba economically to the point where Castro has no other option but to concede defeat and ask for assistance. Before the collapse of the Soviet Union this goal was nearly impossible to achieve. However with the fall of communism, and continued denial of resources to Cuba through the embargo by the United States and its allies, this goal has become quite attainable. The main problem, with this coercive technique is CastroUs unprecedented resilience and firm belief that the United States is an imperialist power attempting to oust him from his rightful position as the undisputed Cuban leader.(DeVarona) On the other side of the coin, there are many people who believe there are reasons why the United Sates embargo is unjust and should be done away with. The United States truly has no business enforcing an embargo unless its intrinsic interests are in jeopardy. Intrinsic interests include the protection of vital U.S. resources such as fuel and energy. Also under the category of intrinsic interests falls the well being of members of the United States population. Many claim that these interests of the United States are not threatened at all. Instead, the reasons for maintaining the embargo are strategic. Strategic interests Rinclude credibility of the U.S. threat to use military force; the American resolve to remain engaged in the world; and the U.S. commitment to defend its allies.S (Tanter: Cuba chapter) The difference between the intrinsic interests of the United States and the strategic ones, are that intrinsic interest are of vital importance to the well being of the United States itself. Strategic interests, while still important, are not vital to the existence of the U.S.. For example, RTo the extent that Castro stands up to Washington, he challenges U.S. credibility, resolve and commitments.S(Tanter: Cuba Chapter) Another highly accepted contention as to why the United States should eliminate the embargo on Cuba is because it diversifies Cuba's potential trade partners.(Tanter: Cuba chapter) In other words, if U.S. companies were allowed to do business with Cuba then it would be probable that this is the only nation from which they would trade. With the current embargo in place, CastroUs regime is forced to find other trading partners, thus diversifying their alliances with other nations besides the United States.(Tanter, Cuba chapter) Not only does the embargo help Castro only in these areas, it also allows him to divert the focus of his regime from the internal problems faced by the people of Cuba, to the outside interference by the United States. This shift of focus also allows Castro to help place much of the blame for the internal problems on the U.S.. (Tanter, Cuba chapter) These contentions of the embargoUs futility are convincing but highly disputed themselves. First of all, the United States is many times referred to in the world community as RBig Brother,S implying that it keeps a watchful and protective eye on the events occurring around the world. It is in this role that the United States has taken it upon itself, that it has attempted to dethrone the Castro regime. Although Castro is openly anti-American, it is his totalitarian regime, and his lengthy list of human rights violations that has so deeply offended the United States and the world. In addition, although the embargo on Cuba has forced Castro to trade with other nations of the world, this is clearly not his ideal scenario since the richest most powerful nation in the world lies only miles from CubaUs shores. Yes, there are other places for Cuba to turn in light of the U.S. embargo, but these nations do not have the influence of the United States nor the convenience to Fidel Castro. A rational decision maker chooses the most efficient choice. A Rational decision maker identifies options, considers costs and benefits, and the likelihood of success. They would also trade off expected costs and benefits to establish expected value. After all of this a rational actor would then select an option that promises the highest gain or the lowest loss.(Tanter: 472NOT1. DOC, September 8, 1996) Through this measurement it seems clear that Fidel Castro would not be considered a rational actor. Castro is more of a cognitive decision maker, one who is constrained by their cognitive beliefs and biases. This is evident through the fact that CastroUs anti-American beliefs appear to dictate the way in which he makes his decisions regarding Cuban policy. Castro also operates out of a basement of fears. This is a decision maker who is more concerned with internal fears and needs and basically ignores external opportunities and pressures.(Tanter class notes) This is evident from CastroUs ultimate fear of losing power. This prevents him from holding the free elections necessary for him to be a legitimized leader. Castro has refused to hold free elections in Cuba even after receiving a letter from over 250 parliamentarians and other elected officials from Latin America, Spain, and the Caribbean, asking Castro to Rsave the country from bloody confrontation and to open the door to national reconciliation by giving way to a government of transition that would facilitate free and pluralistic elections. The document ended with an appeal to Castro to resign.S(DeVarona) Castro is such a perfect example of a dictator acting out of the basement of fears, that he apparently refuses to concede the fact that if he gives into the American desires of reforming Cuba to a democratic state, he will be able to give the Cuban people a society of wealth and prosperity. This is not only because of the choices which would be opened for the people of Cuba, but also because the amount of capital that would be placed in Cuba by the United States would help replace the subsidies lost with the fall of the Soviet Union. The assistance needed by Cuba at this time is quite large considering that even with Soviet subsidies the Cuban people were living lives filled with rationing and shortages. Today CubaUs economy is in even bigger trouble because it does not have the multi-billion dollar crutch of the Soviet Union to lean on. Instead, the people of Cuba today, must long for the days of Soviet assistance, even though most of that money was squandered in one way or another by the Castro regime. The problem arises then, from the perspective of the United States, how to stop Fidel Castro from remaining in power. Since he operates out of a basement of fears, deterrence is eliminated from the equation. It is nearly impossible to deter someone who will just become more flustered and use the attempt at deterrence to justify more acts which the United States is attempting to stop. Castro is also quite loss averse, meaning he is more concerned with keeping his power than anything else. He views the loss of power as unacceptable. Clearly the hope of deterring Castro from continuing to commit human rights violations, harbor terrorists, and run a suppressive regime would be ineffectual. The appropriate way of dealing with an inner directed leader such as Fidel Castro is through coercive diplomacy. This is an action taken by one party to change unacceptable behavior in another party.(Tanter, class notes) This also is done in order to undo the actions of another nation. This is exactly what the United States has done by placing the trade embargo on Cuba. Without the opportunity to trade with the United States, the hope is that Castro will slowly realize that this trade is necessary. Once Cuba realizes that trade with the United States is vital for its well being, then it must choose to play by the terms that the U.S. dictates. These terms however stand in stark contrast to the beliefs held dear by Fidel Castro. Since it can be inferred that Castro is cognitive decision maker who lets his own beliefs dictate the way he runs Cuba, Castro, it appears will not be willing to concede these points in order to regain trade with the United States. Since Castro cannot be deterred from his actions, and since he is also a cognitive decision maker, it becomes very hard for the United States to have much influence on the way Castro runs Cuba. The embargo however, is the most logical action for the United States to take. Some criticize the embargo, stating that it does next to nothing if anything at all. The question has arisen as to why the United States does not enter Cuba and psychically take Fidel Castro out of power. This would not be an appropriate way of dealing with the situation. Simply because the U.S. does not agree with the actions and policies of the Castro regime, gives the U.S. no authority to do anything militarily. As a nation, the U.S. can sever its ties with Cuba cutting off the potential benefits Cuba receives directly and indirectly, but the use of military force would be an imperialistic maneuver. Instead, the embargo serves the purposes of the U.S. quite well. It is fact the embargo gives the message to the world that, not only does the United States condemn the activities of Castro, but will not allow any member of its country to even do business with Cuba. There is much promise that the U.S. embargo is accomplishing its goals of coercing Castro to relinquish the stranglehold he has on Cuba. The seriousness of this situation is evidenced by the growing frustration in high Cuban government circles over CastroUs unwillingness to change to avoid the looming disaster, which has manifested itself in the unparalleled number of recent defections of Cuban diplomats, professionals, and even security and military personnel throughout the world.(DeVarona) In addition the economic decline has managed to reach almost everyone on the island nation. Even the soldiers who were once immune to the economic conditions of Cuba, Rsell their boots to feed their families, and officers earn less than hotel bellhops.S (DeVarona) Let us not forget that the embargo has only recently been able to become effective through the fall of the Soviet Union and its subsequent cessation of contributions to keep the Cuban economy afloat. RThere is no better affirmation as to the effectiveness of the U.S. policy towards Cuba than the fact that the unilateral lifting of the U.S. sanctions has become the number one foreign policy priority of the Castro regime.S (DeVarona) a public statement of disapproval regarding the manner in which Fidel Castro runs his nation. In There are two basic methods that the United States can use to attempt to force change in the actions of another nation, they are deterrence and coercion. Since it is clear that Fidel Castro operates out of a basement of fears, afraid of losing the power that he claimed thirty odd years ago , deterrence would be infective for this instance. The fact that Castro is a cognitive decision maker and not a rational actor complicates the situation. The United States cannot use conventional methods for its aim of dethroning Castro, and freeing the Cuban people of the tyranny inflicted by CastroUs regime. Instead the most effective method of attaining this goal is through the trade embargo which is currently in place. Many who oppose the embargo argue its effectiveness, stating that the embargo has been in place for over thirty years and has not yet yielded any significant results. Although this is true, the embargo should only really be looked at since 1991 when the massive Soviet subsidies to Cuba were cut off. Before this, the money that Cuba lost with its lack of ability to trade with The United States was compensated for by the money given to them by the U.S.S.R.. Even when the embargo was first put into action, no one could have possibly believed that would work overnight. Today it is clear that the embargo with Cuba is showing its effects by the weakening of the Cuban economy to a point where an upcoming decision by CubaUs government is inevitable. Even though Castro has made it clear that he will not relinquish power at any cost, there will come a time in the not so distant future when this will no longer be a choice, but instead a necessity. If the Cuban economy continues to deteriorate, and the people of Cuba are continued to be denied the freedoms consistent with democracy, the people of Cuba may be forced to take matters into their own hands and forcefully oust Castro from his self appointed title as leader of Cuba. Any hope that Castro will engage in democratic reform if the embargo is lifted is just wishful thinking.(DeVarona) The reforms Castro has claimed to have made up until this point have been absolute propaganda in order to attempt to fool the rest of the world that he has changed, and ideally would lead to the lifting of the embargo and a flood of international capital into the struggling nation. What Castro has not anticipated is the level of U.S. power throughout the world. Not only does the U.S. have the power to stop trade from its own companies, but the U.S. has veto power in the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. These two agencies would represent possible options for Cuba, in order to borrow money based on their economic status. The embargo is the most effective, most appropriate action for the United States to subscribe to. It is non-violent and has immensely more effect on CubaUs economy than the United StatesU. To this day, it has significantly weakened the Cuban economy, and forced Fidel Castro to lose much of the popular support he once held. RIt is time to let the policy take effect, and not to undo the strategy that has only recently begun to achieve its objectives.S(DeVarona) Bilbliography 1)Bender, Lynn Darell. The Politics of Hostility , The Inter American University Press, 1975. 2)Bazbaz, Caroline. Final paper on Cuba -no title- Tanter home page-http://www-personal.umich.edu/~rtanter/F95PS472_Papers/BAZBAZ.CAROLINE.CUBA 3)DeVarona, Adolfo Leyva Ph.D.. RPropaganda and Reality: ALook at the U.S. Embargo Against CastroUs CubaS Internet adress-http://www.canfnet.org/canf-lib/embg_eng.txt 4)Elliot, Jeffrey M. and Dymally, Mervyn M.. Fidel Castro: Nothing Can Stop the Course of History, Pathfinder Press, 1986. 5)Jordan, David C.. Revolutionary Cuba and the End of the Cold War, University Press of America, 1993. 6)Klare, Michael. Rogue States and Nuclear Outlaws. Hill and Wang. 1995 7)Tanter, Raymond. Cuba Chapter. internet adress- http://www-personal.umich.edu/~rtanter/rogue/cub 8)Tanter, Raymond. 472NOT1. DOC, September 8, 1996. http:www-personal.umich.edu/~rtanter 9)Tanter, Raymond. Class notes- Political Science 472, University of Michigan. 1996.