Last week, Cuba’s resident dictator Fidel Castro finally decided to hang up his fatigues and turn over the presidency to his brother, Raul. While only a credulous optimist might believe that this portends democratic change, it would take a whole other class of fool to believe that our own government can manage to learn a lesson from this debacle.
Despite all of the best efforts of the U.S. to dislodge Castro, it appears that finally old age is the culprit that did Castro in, despite the best efforts of nine presidential administrations.
Naturally, our failure to push Castro out of power comes not for a lack of trying — the U.S. has attempted everything from exploding cigars and trying to poison Castro so his trademark beard would fall out (how exactly this would compromise Castro as a dictator remains unclear) to a disastrously inept invasion attempt (Bay of Pigs).
The crown jewel of our failed policy to oust Castro has been the long-standing economic embargo, the only real success of which has been to deteriorate the reputation of the U.S. while providing a reliable propaganda piece for Castro’s government and sympathizers alike.
The embargo started shortly after Castro came to power and began expropriating the property of U.S. businesses in Cuba. It has continually ratcheted up through the years, many times at the behest of angry Cuban expatriates living in the U.S., despite only having managed to solidify Castro’s iron grip on power. As it stands, U.S. citizens are restricted from travel to the island and are forbidden from doing business on or with Cuba.
Of course, like many government policies, the failure of the embargo has only had the effect of emboldening its proponents. Advocates of continuing (or even strengthening) the embargo frequently cite Cuba’s continued commitment to communism and its abysmal human rights record.
Yet autocratic governments and a complete disregard for human rights have hardly stopped us from trading with certain countries in the past, much less making them “strategic partners.” One need only look to the examples of Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to prove this point — when it suits our interests, issues such as poor governance and disrespect for human rights are highly expendable.
Rather, Cuba’s main offense appears to be in humbling the prestige of the United States.
While those in the federal government may be too proud to ever acknowledge the embarrassing failure of the Cuban embargo to provide a vehicle for change, they can draw a lesson from it in dealing with future autocrats. After all, Castro will hardly be the last autocrat America will deal with — already Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez is lining up to take his place.
Economic sanctions rarely accomplish their goals — instead of destabilizing dictators, they help to consolidate their power while providing a reliable propaganda device to justify the squalor they impose upon their subjects. One need only look to dictators like Kim Jong-Il and Saddam Hussein to demonstrate this point.
Rather, a far more reliable strategy is to open the floodgates to American goods, culture and travel. In the end, freedom inevitably has a way of breaking dictators’ monopolies on power everywhere.
What’s your view on U.S.-Cuba foreign policy? E-mail Steve at [email protected]
