Trump is Right to Reset U.S.-Cuba Policy JoséR. Cárdenas Foreign Policy Magazine June 14,2017
Reports arecoming in that this Friday, in a Miami speech, President Donald Trump willunveil his revisions to former President Barack Obama’s controversial policy tonormalize U.S. relations with the Castro dictatorship in Cuba. While nospecifics have as yet leaked, it is largely expected that Trump will tightencertain aspects of the myriad executive orders Obama issued to circumvent theU.S. embargo, primarily in the areas of liberalized tourist travel and othercommercial exchanges with the island (the embargo was codified by Congress in1996). Trumpis also expected to make the case for more reciprocity in the relationship — inthat Obama’s deal was woefully one-sided, with the Castro regime accruingwindfall economic benefits from increased U.S. trade and travel withoutconceding anything in terms of its one-party state, closed economy, andrepression of human rights. Itis a point that President Trump has driven home previously. During the campaignlast October, he called the Obama administration’s negotiations “a very weakagreement.” As president-elect in November, he tweeted, “If Cuba is unwillingto make a better deal for the Cuban people, the Cuban/American people and theU.S. as a whole, I will terminate the deal.” Mediareports are suggesting the Trump administration may also specifically targetcommercial dealings with entities controlled by the Cuban military. That’s becauseunder Obama policy, the military has been steadily expanding its reach into allfacets of the tourist industry, among other sectors of the Cuban economy. Itsholding company, GAESA (Enterprise Administration Group), owns the best hotelsin Cuba and most retail outlets, rental car companies, and import entities. It is run by RaúlCastro’s son-in-law, Gen. Luis Alberto Rodríguez López-Callejas, one of themost powerful men on the island. Estimates are that GAESA companies account formore than half of the business revenue generated in Cuba — and that number isrising. Blockingtransactions that serve only to reinforce the regime’s control over the Cubanpeople would restore badly needed integrity to U.S. policy. (It should benoted, however, that even the supposed “private enterprises” in Cuba — such ashome restaurants, rentable apartments, taxis, and so on — are known to be sothoroughly penetrated by the regime that the line between ordinary Cubans andregime is impossible to discern.) Inthe past, I have written that in reassessing Obama’s policy towards Cuba, oneneed only to hold it to the standard his administration set for itself: namely,whether it works to “ improve the lives of the Cuban people.” Thus,all executive orders issued by Obama and commercial deals struck under theObama administration ought to be judged according to whether they help theCuban people or whether they buttress the Castro regime. Any activity found tobe sustaining the regime’s control rather than directly benefiting the Cubanpeople should be scrapped. That, and restoring common cause with Cuba’s beleagueredhuman rights and dissident communities, should be front and center of areconfigured U.S. Cuba policy. Asfar as broader commercial transactions with the Castro regime, the Trumpadministration should consider resurrecting the Arcos Principles for ForeignInvestment in Cuba, named after the late revolutionary fighter-turned-dissidentand inspired by the Sullivan Principles, which sought to govern commercialtransactions with the apartheid regime in South Africa. Essentially, it wouldmean urging any commercial entity doing or looking to do business in Cuba tocommit to promoting human rights and fair-labor hiring and employmentpractices. Forexample, U.S. companies engaged in Cuba should demand that wages be paiddirectly to Cuban workers in convertible pesos known as CUCs. Current practiceis that Cuban workers earn a few hundred dollars a week, paid to the regime,which then pays workers in worthless Cuban pesos, known as CUPs. Defenders of Obama’s policy assert thatit was not meant to produce change overnight, that the pre-Obama approach wasan ignominious failure, and that changing policy now would only hurt the Cubanpeople— as if it is the responsibility of the United States and not the Castro regimeto provide for the Cuban people’s welfare. (It is a particularly odious aspectof the Castro regime that it has always tried to leverage the suffering of theCuban people for sympathy and concessions from abroad.) Moreover,these advocates have no special claim to being frustrated over the lack ofchange in Cuba; everyone who cares about Cuba is frustrated. That doesn’t meanwe all have to agree that the appropriate policy response is to open up tradeand travel with the Castro dictatorship and then hope for the best. Still,no one is expecting that President Trump’s reset of U.S.-Cuba policy is merelygoing to be a return to the status quo ante. As stated, a defensible U.S. Cubapolicy is one that supports the Cuban people with as little support to theregime as possible. President Obama professed to want to help average Cubanshave a better day; a more fitting U.S. policy is to stand with those Cubans whowant a better future. Photo credit: RHONA WISE/AFP/GettyImages
