Stefanie Anding Political Science 472 Professor Raymond Tanter June 20, 1996 Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, the communist threat has vanished from the Western hemisphere. Or hasnUt it? The Cold War is over and military dearmament is in progress as is the democratization of many former communist states. Few states remain that refuse to transform their communist political forms of government, such as the Republic of Cuba. Cuba is the only state in the Western hemisphere that is still under communist rule. The Cuban government in no respect matches the power of the United States government and therefore has no direct influence in United States affairs. Although Cuba is in possession of many military arms, Cuba lacks an organized military and could easily be crushed by the United States military. Cuba has not proven to be a threat to U.S. security since the fall of the Soviet Union, so why is the United States maintaining and increasing the sanctions against Cuba? In order to understand the actions of the states and actors of these states, there are some theoretical applications that should be introduced to comprehend the nature of the United States governmentUs embargo against Cuba. Rationality is a nationUs pursuit of its goals and its values. As long as a nation seeks to achieve these goals, the nation is acting rationally. There are constraints on rationality, such as misperception in the case of Cuba. Misperception is induced when the intentions of actor #1 are misunderstood by actor #2 or interpreted differently than originally intended by actor #1. For example, if an animal is injured and you try to help it, the animal may bite you because it is misperceiving your intentions to help as intentions to cause more harm. Two factors of misperception include motivated and unmotivated bias. An unmotivated bias is when an actor sees what he expects to see. A motivated bias is when an actor sees what he wants to see. Castro acts upon a motivated bias in which he opposes capitalism for his country. Castro maintains that capitalism will ultimately destroy itself and is an unstable form of government with no government support for its citizens. Through the many changes in political regimes across the world from communism to democracy, the economies of these states are suffering in the transition. CubaUs communist regime would ultimately suffer more than it is today should democratic reforms be introduced to the Cuban government. The Cuban economy has actually improved from 0.7 percent growth rate in 1994 to a 2 percent growth rate in 1995. Castro maintains that any reforms in his regime would make CubaUs economy unstable and fragile once again. Deterrence is a process through which a defender seeks to prevent a potential initiator from action. The United States applied deterrence theory to Cuba during the Cold War when Cuba was a puppet-state of the Soviet Union. During the Cuban missile crisis, it was ultimately deterrence that prevented any course of action on the part of Cuba, via the Soviet Union. Today, the United States government uses coercion in relations with the Cuban government. Coercion seeks to get a defender either to take an action or to undo prior actions. The United States government is clearly trying to coerce the Cuban government to take action and to democratize the Castro regime by imposing the economic sanctions on Cuba. The United States was hopeful that Cuba would crumble under the United StatesU economic alienation from Cuba and that Cuba would resort to abiding by United States government policies. What the United States did not consider was the continuing support that Europe, Latin America, and Canada maintain with Cuba through trade. The U.S. economic sanctions have very little effect on Cuba as Cuba has reached out to states that will make up for trade lost with the United States. The Cuban government, under the ruling of Fidel Castro, has demonstrated consistent disregard for internationally accepted standards of human rights and for democratic values which the United States is attempting Cuba to undo through coercion. The United States government is alone in her beliefs that economic sanctions will bring about change in Cuba. U.S. sanctions have been imposed on Cuba for over thirty years, since the Cuban Assets Control Regulations were passed by the United States government in July of 1963. While the Cuban government was supported by the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War, the U.S. sanctions were merely an economic imposition to Cuba and had no effect on the Cuban government. The Castro regime received an estimated $100 to $150 billion in Soviet and Eastern European aid over thirty years and an additional $1.2 billion a year in military assistance. It has only been in the past six years, since the fall of the Soviet Union, that Cuba has felt the harm of the embargo and the harm of the deprivation of U.S. dollars on its economy. The United States government claims that only through the application of threats and sanctions can Fidel Castro be overthrown and a democratic institution be installed. Yet, sanctions eliminate all open communication between the United States government and the Cuban government. Castro is under no means willing to surrender his power in lieu of a democratic regime. His harsh and militant dictatorship will remain as long as he is alive. Castro has been interrogated; bribed, by being on the CIA payroll under President Bush; and brought to many negotiation tables. If talks and open communication will not stir Castro in his power, sanctions will not leave their mark on CubaUs communist regime either. Besides imposing U.S. sanctions against the Republic of Cuba for failure to respond positively to democratic reforms in Cuba and pursuing grave human rights violations, the United States government also imposed economic sanctions against Cuba for its strong involvement of state-sponsored terrorism. The Cuban government has trained and supported thousands of terrorist groups and remains an important network for these international terrorists. Although Cuba has not sponsored any terrorist activities since 1994, Cuba provided a safehaven to several terrorists in Cuba in 1995. Initially, the United States imposed sanctions against Cuba in an attempt to rehabilitate the Castro regime. Rehabilitation is used when sanctions are implemented on the offender (Cuba) in response to a particular transgression. When Cuba was under the influence of the Soviet Union, U.S. sanctions could only attempt to be rehabilitative since a retributive result would have been cushioned by economic and military assistance by the Soviet Union. Now that Cuba is no longer a Soviet puppet-state, the U.S. sanctions have become retributive. Retribution is the applicable theory to a situation if the main purpose of imposing sanctions on a state are to oppose a regime or to right a wrong. The U.S. sanctions against Cuba only serve to punish the Cuban governmentUs uncooperative behavior in complying with United States government policies. Retribution should always be used as a last resort to accomplish a goal. Retribution eliminates all open communication as well as any good will to negotiate. Imposed sanctions are somewhat of a war between two states; threat and retaliation. In this case, the United States is threatening and following through with punishment of Cuba by withholding open trade and Cuba is retaliating this RaggressionS by non-conformity, by seeking trading partners with other countries. Cuba has sought trading privileges with Europe, Latin America, and Canada that are willing to maintain economic relations and open communication with Cuba. Canada is currently drilling for oil in Cuba, which proves the extent to which Canada is willing to trade with Cuba. Although European democracies are against the use of sanctions imposed on a country as a means to alter that countryUs political behavior or political institution, European states have also refused to trade with Cuba to a certain extent because of a $6.8 billion debt that Cuba has not yet paid. European countries favor open communication and diplomatic relations to resolve international violations of human rights and a transition of government policies. The Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 is geared to pressure the Castro regime toward democratic reform and to isolate his regime in order to weaken his dictatorship in Cuba as well as in the international sphere. The Act strengthened the United States embargo against Cuba by closing any loopholes that allowed foreign subsidies of American businesses to conduct more than $700 million a year in trade with Cuba. It also protests the grave human rights violations imposed on Cuban nationals. The Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 fights to prevent the restriction of the Cuban peopleUs exercise of freedom of speech, press, assembly, and other rights recognized by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations. The official statement of policy under the United States Code, Title 22, Chapter 69, Paragraph 6002 outlines the United States views in ten points. I will state and briefly discuss some of these points. (1) RIt should be the policy of the United States to seek a peaceful transition to democracy and a resumption of economic growth in Cuba through the peaceful application of sanctions directed at the Castro regime and support for the Cuban people.S The United States has filled this point with too many important goals to achieve at once. Human rights and a peaceful transition to a democratic form of government in Cuba are the main issues that must be fully executed in order to satisfy the United States governmentUs desire for the future of Cuba. The elimination of human rights violations should be the first and most important aspect to work through. Once CastroUs regime has learned to respect and appreciate the individual humanitarian rights of its citizens, it is possible to establish a better relationship between Fidel Castro and the Cuban people. Democracy will not come about under Castro, but reforms of his strict communist regime are a more likely result. (2) RIt should be the policy of the United States to seek the cooperation of other democratic countries in this policy.S Although cooperation of other democratic states would be useful in convincing Castro to reform his communist regime towards a more democratic from of government, the United States must respect those democratic states that do not agree with United States government policies concerning Cuba. European nations are against the imposition of sanctions to punish countries that do not abide by international laws and regulations. The United States government stands alone in her foreign policy actions concerning Cuba and should acknowledge the fact that the United States must act as a unitary actor in regards to the economic sanctions against Cuba. (3) RIt should be the policy of the United States to make clear to other countries that, in determining its relations with them, the United States will take into account their willingness to cooperate in such a policy.S This stance shows poor use of well-established diplomatic relations by the United States government with other democratic nations. Diplomatic relations consist of friendly relations with that country and should entail the respect and opinion of that government. Putting good diplomatic relations between the United States and other democratic nations on the line in order to convince these other nations of United States policies regarding Cuba is a degrading and resentful way to conduct foreign relations. The United States assumes control over governments that are perfectly capable to act on their own accord, especially when dealing with communist states. The United States must be careful not to overstep her boundaries in international relations. (5) RIt should be the policy of the United States to continue vigorously to oppose the human rights violations of the Castro regime.S The United States has the backing of the United Nations in this matter. All democratic countries are outraged by the grave human rights abuses being carried out in Cuba. Cuba expects European and Latin American countries not to challenge its national policies and to respect the Cuban governmentUs denial of human rights violations, yet the Cuban government is unwilling to let the United Nations representatives for Human Rights visit and inspect the situation in Cuba. Cuba rejects the United Nations altogether since it operates in a democratic fashion. The Red Cross, however, has been allowed to enter Cuba to facilitate medical care for Cuban nationals. As I mentioned above, the human rights violations should be the most important issue to pursue and condemn. (6) RIt should be the policy of the United States to maintain sanctions on the Castro regime so long as it continues to refuse to move toward democratization and greater respect for human rights.S This is where the United States stands on her own. No other nation is willing to support the United States foreign policy action to seize all trading privileges with Cuba. Economic sanctions are not approved by the European states, although these states also refuse to trade with Cuba for its inability to pay its $6.8 billion debt to Western European states. United States economic sanctions could cause an implosion of the Cuban economy, causing instability and chaos among the Cuban nationals. The Cuban people would probably take the opportunity of an implosion to create a civil war and overthrow Fidel Castro in such an implosion, which would result in extreme bloodshed. (8) RIt should be the policy of the United States to encourage free and fair elections to determine CubaUs political future.S This point touches upon the issues mentioned in points one and six. Should a democratic government be installed, the first dramatic action to undertake would be to install free elections to restore a stable government that has a strong relationship with the Cuban nationals. (10) RIt should be the policy of the United States to initiate immediately the development of a comprehensive United States policy toward Cuba in a post-Castro era.S Although this point reflects the hopeful and ideal outcome of the United States sanctions against CastroUs communist regime, the United States should mind her involvement in Cuba after the stabilization of its new government. Too much power and influence over a new regime can maim a newly-found sense of independence and strength. Under no circumstances will Castro ever be prepared to voluntarily submit himself to democratic influences that would limit his control over Cuba. The United States government should of course be prepared to act accordingly should Castro lose power but this option lies in the far future if at all. The United States needs to focus on the economic sanctions, their influence over Cuba, and other possible ways to deal with communist Cuba. Cuba should not become a United States colony or puppet-state once it has established a democratic government with the help of the United States. A true democracy entails the influence of its national policies by the nationals of that democracy and of no other foreign government. As long as Cuba is somewhat unstable in its reforms and requests the help of the United States, the United States government should be involved. Once Cuba is strong and healthy again, the United States should retract as she will have already meddled heavily in CubaUs national affairs to an extreme extent. Cuba must act on its own to install a feeling of pride and courage in the Cuban nationals. The Helms-Burton Act of 1996 has been universally rejected as it defies free trade agreements of nations across the world. It challenges the Latin American countries and the European application of sanctions in that it condemns any country that refuses to abide by United States government regulations of sanctions and imposes trade restrictions against that country in the same amount that the country is trading with Cuba. RThe bill would put the force of law behind the U.S. embargo imposed against Cuba in 1962 by executive order, but goes further by barring from the United States any foreigner who does business on property that is now claimed by a United States citizen. U.S. allies have objected that the measure would violate open trade agreements.S The Helms-Burton Act also allows lawsuits to be filed against foreign companies that involve former American products or associations in trade with Cuba. The Helms-Burton Act is an insult to the intelligence of other states, especially democratic nations who know the ideals of and the repercussions of ignorance in a democratic system. The Helms-Burton Act authorizes the President of the United States to withhold aid from any country that is helping finance CubaUs nuclear power plant by the equal amount of aid that that country is crediting Cuba. The United States government assumes authority over the qualifications of other nations to make their own decisions by encouraging an international economic embargo against Cuba. Each nation makes decisions on the basis of its own foreign policy as well as on the basis of the values that citizens of that country hold with respect to their international politics. The Helms-Burton Act converts all existing orders pertaining to the U.S. embargo against Cuba into law, preventing the President of the United States from lifting or changing these orders. The relations that the United States has with other nations is strained as a result of the signing of the Helms-Burton Act of 1996. As an unidentified European businessman said: RI simply cannot believe that the U.S. is going to risk the cooperation of its NATO partners on matters such as Bosnia or Russia because of this.S President ClintonUs integrity is challenged as is the intention of the United States to become the main actor of policing in the international realm. The signing of the Helms-Burton Act of 1996 by President Clinton was clearly a result of the shoot-down of two unarmed civilian planes flown by Cuban-Americans who were members of the anti-Castro group called Brothers to the Rescue. The Brothers to the Rescue organization patrols the waters between Cuba and the Florida border of the United States searching for Cuban refugees that have fled Cuba to esape the difficult living conditions there. The President had been hesitant to pass the bill but stated: RThe legislation I sign today...sends a strong message to the Cuban government: we will not tolerate attacks on United States citizens, and we will stand with those both inside and outside Cuba who are working for a peaceful transition to freedom and democracy.S The Cuban governmentUs actions in the shoot-down of the two airplanes clearly violated international law since the aircrafts were flying over international waters at the time of the attack. The U.S. economic sanctions imposed against Cuba by the Helms-Burton Act have hindered many humanitarian relief groups from traveling legally and safely to Cuba. The human rights groups must seek approval from the United States government before entering Cuba and must be sensitive to the Cuban governments actions against allowing the human rights activists onto Cuban territory. When acting without prior Cuban government approval, unfortunate killings such as the shoot-down of the two Brothers to the Rescue airplanes occur. A new and different approach towards Cuba must be initiated into the United States government foreign policy. The Helms-Burton Act of 1996 is not a new policy that has been devised, but is simply a reinforcement of the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992. The Helms-Burton Act introduces the ability to file suit against foreign companies for their relations with Cuba, yet the rest of the document enforces the ten points drawn out by the Cuban Democracy Act. At best, the bill may slow the pace of foreign investment in Cuba, which is leveling off anyway for reasons unrelated to American policy. Redefining old Acts and maintaining economic sanctions against Cuba has gotten the United States government nowhere. Working WITH Fidel Castro instead of AGAINST him would be worth considering. Although the Cuban interest groups are strong in Florida as is the Cuban Mafia, the United States government must take the best interest for the United States into account. American businesses and human rights organizations prefer open communication with Cuba in order to establish a profitable and helpful relationship with the Cuban industries and the Cuban nationals, respectively. Since 1996 is an election year, President Clinton was somewhat eager to pass the Helms-Burton Act in order to win the support of the Cuban-Americans in Florida who constitute a large part of the 25 electoral votes that Florida possesses in the national presidential campaign. The United States has tried to influence Cuba with deterrence by punishment, but to no avail. A friendly approach with good open communication skills is the only other diplomatic alternative. An invasion of the island would be obscure as this would only cause bloodshed and spark a civil revolution by the Cuban nationals. It would intensify the oppression of the people in Cuba. Compromise between the United States and Cuba would be a reasonable beginning to a three decade old hatred. The United States government should end the embargo against Cuba and should demand to be able to send in the United Nations representatives for Human Rights or other human rights representatives. The United States must relieve Cuba of any pressure to democratize the political regime of Castro. Although the goal of the United States is ultimately to achieve a democracy in Cuba, it is important to accomplish political goals with ease. The human rights violations are the most crucial issue to confront and should therefore not be overshadowed by attempts to overthrow Castro in the process. Once human rights are being observed and controlled as much as possible, limited business relationships between American and Cuban industries can begin. As trade and business relations increase, so will hopefully the relationship between the United States government and the Cuban government. Working with Castro is worth an attempt to have influence over Cuba to some extent. Since the U.S. economic sanctions have little influence over Castro and his regime, opposite measures to the U.S. embargo cannot result in a more harmful situation for the United States. Cuba poses no direct threat to the United States. Instead of adopting a hostile approach to promote democratic reforms in Cuba, the United States government should pursue a similar strategy that it used against the Soviet Union. Conducting a healthy trading relationship, along with normal diplomatic relations, and cooperative measures from both the United States and the Cuban government will lead Cuba towards capitalism and democracy. Bombarding Cuba with stronger sanctions will only alienate United States from its democratic allies and demoralize the Cuban people. Eventually, the Cuban government will succumb to democratic reforms, whether it be under Castro or not. Why should the United States jeopardize its friendly foreign relations with Europe, Latin America, and Canada by intervening in the trade policies of these countries? Violence, instability, and a weak democratic institution would be the outcome of a rushed overthrow of communist Cuba. The United States needs to concentrate on and react to the immediate needs of the Cuban nationals who are suffering from human rights violations in Cuba but the United States must be patient in the process of molding Cuba into a democratic state.