…and soon thereafter negotiate for missionaries on the Caribbean island?
Many conservatives, including myself, have favored normalizing relations with Cuba for years. One Republican senator says it’s time to lift the embargo. Politics have been the principal reason for the embargo lasting this long: nobody can afford to lose the Cuban-American vote in Florida. But a recent poll shows that a majority of Cuban-Americans now opposes the embargo.
The embargo has long been used by the Castros as a justification for failed collectivist policies in Cuba. Lifting the embargo and offering to normalize relations — and announcing it on VOA and elsewhere — would raise pressure on the Castros to allow more political and economic freedom. My prediction is that lifting the embargo is the quickest way to bring democracy to Cuba.
The Church is prevented from openly proselytizing in Cuba. Just as happened in Russia and Eastern Europe, normalizing relations would eventually lead to missionaries and a greater Church presence on the island. As I have written before, there are several dozen Church members who quietly meet in Havana, and Church officials have quietly visited Cuba for years.
Here’s hoping for quick normalization of U.S.-Cuban relations!
Representative Jeff Flake has been calling on the US to lift the embargo long before Sen. Dick Lugar ever did. Perhaps now there will be a bandwagon sufficient to hold the Johnny-come lately’s to the party.
Good to see some hope for change here.
Hope and change…where have I heard those words before?
🙂
I’m on board. Nothing says irrational and stupid like penalizing the citizenry of an underdeveloped nation because you dislike the loser in charge.
Free Cuba!!…err…something like that
Get some tourist money in and let them see how everyone in the free world lives and communism will go by the way of East Germany.
I hope you’re sitting down, Geoff, because I completely agree with you on this.
For that matter, let’s do the same thing with Iran. Our economic policy toward them only increases the poverty felt by the average Iranian, which foments hatred against the United States and gives their leaders ammunition against us.
Economic embargoes don’t work. They never have in any circumstance. They disproportionately hurt the poor and strengthen the hand of the elites in power.
Totally agree with Geoff and most of the comments. Trade embargoes rarely affect those that are wealthy and/or in power. They hurt the weakest part of the country.
Opening up Cuba to missionaries would be great. However, religion aside, there are at least a few reasons I can come up with why it may be a bad idea:
First, Cuba has no private sector since its economy is predominantly state-owned. If we begin to trade with Cuba, we potentially strengthen the economy of an unfriendly state.
Second, the Castro legacy continues to defy international standards on democracy and human rights, and lifting the embargo now would be a reward of that defiance. If we were to lift the embargo, Democracy should be a required pre-cursor and condition.
There exist international standards on democracy? Where, pray tell? Are we to only trade with friendly democracies? Isn’t this a bit like not letting your children play with Gentile children? Do we not strengthen the economy of China by our trade, not to mention that of Venezuela or Russia?
Your piece aboutCuba is right on the mark. We can negotiate with North Korea, Vietnam and perhaps soon Iran. Why not Cuba? Please don`t tell me because its Raul who is president. How many countries do we deal with that have leaders not elected by the populace. I want to be able to show my children where their ancestors fought the Spanish for Cuba`s freedom.We in the Church should understand that communication is the key to breaking down barriers. That is the Savior`s way.
My wife`s uncle Jose Toedo was the first Cuban patriarch. When Cuba opens up (and changes as a consequence) the Church will be welcomed. It will be tough. Cubans are addicted to their coffee and sex outside of marriage is tolerated by females and encouraged by males. In spite of this, there are those who are praying for the change the Gospel can bring.
I love it when people like Mike Parker and Jjohnsen (who say they almost never agree with me) find something we can agree on. Hey, guys, it’s the era of post-partisanship!
Geoff,
Even I agree with you on this one. Or perhaps it is you that agrees with me.
The embargo was not useless, though its purpose is past. It wasn’t about feelings, about turning Cuban hearts against Fidel. It was about weakening a Soviet satellite on our border, and for that, the embargo was successful at producing an impotent Cuba, one that is not a danger to the United States, even though it wanted very much to be one. Feelings were rendered irrelevant. (Likewise, the economic sanctions against Iraq before 2003.)
John M, agreed. There is a lot of history regarding the embargo that many people are not aware of. I would argue that during the 1960s it served some purpose — we could not ignore the Castro regime and the thousands who were killed without some kind of protest. Many of the people who say the embargo was useless now call for economic sanctions rather than military action against rogue regimes. That’s what we adopted against Cuba (after the unsuccessful Bay of Pigs fiasco).
People also forget the 1970s adventures of the Cuban military in Africa and Latin America and conveniently forget Grenada and the Mariel boatlift and on and on.
By the 1980s the embargo had probably outlived its usefulness. I have opposed it since about 1988.
Pingback: State of Irresistible (Dis)Grace « Irresistible (Dis)Grace
Yes, I agree with lifting the embargo. It will increase trade and tourism.