The Caribbean Mosaic - the Best US Foreign Policy for Cuba - Essay Example

The Caribbean Mosaic: the Best US Foreign Policy for Cuba Introduction In 1898, Cuba gained independence from Spain as an end result of Spanish-American war (Thomas, 1998, p. 3). For this reason, the United States of America gained a significant influence over the economic and political activities in Cuba. Since then, the United States owned a majority of foreign investment in Cuba. For this reason, people in Cuba were unconsciously following the American foreign policy which is solely influenced by having democratic form of government. Eventually, the economic and political relationship between Cuba and the United States ended soon after the Cuban Revolution won back in 1959. Before the Cuban Revolution took place, thousands and millions of women and Cuban citizens who had an African descent suffered a lot from social and racial discrimination (Prevost, 2009, p. 138). Due to the unequal educational opportunity between men and women, majority of the women were allowed to work only as a domestic helper and prostitutes. Because of the Cuban people’s desire not only to gain national independence from other countries like the United States and the Soviet Union but also to construct a society that is capable of improving its health and educational program without having the people undergo social problems related to racism and sexism, the Cuban Revolution which applies “the concept of military organization as a basis for communist revolution” took place (Horowitz, 1998, p. 566). Given that the United States is pro-democratic type of government, the United States has maintained a trade embargo status with Cuba making it illegal for any U.S. corporation to conduct business transactions in Cuba. As stated in the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992, the United States will continue to maintain trade status until such time that the Cuban regime decided to move towards democratization and high respect for human rights (Department of State - United States of America, 2009). For the past 36 years, the United States has no formal diplomatic changes towards Cuba. For this reason, this study aims to discuss the best US foreign policy applicable with Cuba. Should the US foreign policy towards Cuba remain as the current trade embargo status? Have we reached the point whereby the US foreign policy for Cuba should start lifting up the trade embargo status? As part of going through the main discussion, whether or not the foreign relationship between the United States and Vietnam – which is also a communist state should be considered as a precedent for normalising relations between the United States and Cuba will be justified. Logical Reasons behind the Strong Need to Change the US Foreign Policy in Cuba Continuously Implementing the Trade Embargo Policy on Cuba will not Remove Fidel Castro’s Government in Cuba Between the years 1960 – 1962, the US government implemented the trade embargo as a way of stopping Cuba from helping the revolutionaries and to remove its troops in Africa among others (Sullivan, 2005; Smith, 1997). Given the fact that the implementation of trade embargo against Cuba existed for almost 40 years now, it is highly recommended for the current US government to consider this particular US foreign policy as something that is already obsolete and has to be reconsidered for a change (Smith, 1997). Over the years, we have already witnessed that continuing the implementation of trade embargo is not effective in terms of removing the Fidel Castro government in Cuba. Implementation of Trade Embargo in Cuba Disrupts Local and International Business Opportunities For close to four decades, the United States is not gaining much economic benefits out of implementing the trade embargo in Cuba. Cuba is known for its massive production of sugarcane and tobacco aside from fishing, nickel ore and fruit plantation (Cuba, 2009). Considering that Cuba is located in south of Florida close to the Bahamas aside from its situation in the Caribbean Sea (Cuba, 2009a), thousands of businessmen in the United States and other US allies are actually losing a lot of business opportunities because of the implementation of trade embargo policy on Cuba. Basically, the US government’s refusal to start negotiating with Cuba only hurts the US and international economy in the sense that the US and other allies will not have the opportunity to have a reasonable compensation for the Americans’ lost of properties and profits out of operating business in Cuba (ibid). Even though the implementation of trade embargo in Cuba limits the economic progress of Cubans, it does not entirely prevent the Cubans from enjoying economic progress that comes from increased foreign remittances and the country’s growing dependency on tourism (Cooper, Kennelly, & Ordunez-Garcia, 2006). Considering this point of view, the US government’s decision to isolate Cuba from its economic and political activities and Cubans’ decision to practice communism only strengthen Cubans’ ability to improve its healthcare and educational system (Spiegel, 2006). Implementation of Trade Embargo in Cuba Directly Violates the US Trade Law and International Law Aside from regulating the current trade activities within and outside the country, the US trade law is totally against the practice of unfair trading practices (HG.org, 2009). Since 1994, the Summit of the Americas exerted an effort to unite and implement a single free trade throughout the US (ibid). Similar to the US trade law, international trade law aims to promote open exchange of goods, capital and services across the international borders and/or territories (International Trading, 2009). For this reason, it is obvious that the US’s effort to continuously implement the trade embargo in Cuba is illegal in the sense that it obviously violates the international free trade law (Smith, 1997). Back in 1990s, the US government’s decision not to lift the trade embargo and its refusal to sell food and medicine to Cubans as stated in the Cuban Democracy Act (CDA) in 1992 and Helms-Burton Act in 1996 violates the international law (Smith, 1997; Kirkpatrick, 1996). As a negative result, people in Cuba experienced the worst epidemic of neurological diseases. US’s Decision to Remove the Trade Embargo against Cuba will Increase the Number of its Allies and Normalizes the US-Cuba Relationship The incidence of cold war has been over for almost 40 years. Therefore, lifting the trade embargo policy against Cuba could open new business and political relationship in the near future. Rather than disengaging potential business activities in Cuba, the US government could eventually develop a better foreign relationship with Cuba. As a result, there is a strong possibility that the US government could increase the total number of US allies around the world aside from normalizing the relations between US and Cuba (Sullivan, 2005; Smith, 1997). Discussion The case of US-and-Cuba is very much similar with the case between the US-and Vietnam. In the past, the United States was very much focused on promoting democratic type of government around the world. For this reason, the US government’s effort to eliminate communism has triggered the US politicians to initiate war against foreign countries. Back in 1994, President Clinton lifted its trade embargo against Vietnam as a way of normalizing its diplomatic relations (Current Events, 2009). Because of the US president’s decision to lift the trade embargo against Vietnam, Vietnam immediately promised to cooperate with the US in terms of identifying and returning the remains of 2,238 US soldiers after 19 years since the Vietnam War in 1975 (Glass, 2008). Eventually, the Vietnamese government managed to identify some of the US soldiers’ remains. During the globalization era, it is necessary on the part of the United States to build good business and political relationship with as much foreign country as possible. As part of boosting the US economy, President Clinton initiated his first visit in Vietnam as a way of improving the US foreign relation with Vietnam back in 2000 (Cockburn, 1994; This Day in History, 1994). In line with this matter, gradually removing the US implemented trade embargo against its enemies can be considered as an international political strategy that is effective in terms of enabling the United States to enter into reconciliation with its foreign enemies (Greenhouse, 1994). Conclusion In the past, US government was very much focused on controlling other countries to implement democratic type of government. Since 2000, the practice of global trading is essential part of economic success. Because of the recent US economic crisis, it is necessary on the part of the US government to start re-building its foreign relations with its enemies. The US government’s decision to uplift the trade embargo against Vietnam can be considered as a precedent for normalizing relations between the United States and its foreign enemies. By lifting the trade embargo which was implemented against Cuba, the US government will have the opportunity to re-establish political and economic trust with the Cubans. As a result, not only will the American businessmen and US allies gain economic benefit out of establishing business in Cuba but also have the opportunity to renegotiate with the Cuban government regarding the possible compensation for the lost properties and profits during the past US-Cuban trading activities (Smith, 1997). Aside from lifting the trade embargo, the US government should also consider removing the prohibition on the sale of foods and medicines to Cuba. *** End *** References Cockburn, Patrick. "Independent." 3 February 1994. Clinton set to lift trade embargo on Vietnamese: Decision imminent as Senate votes to give boost to US business and expedite search for missing servicemen. 10 July 2009 . Cooper, Richard S., Joan F. Kennelly and Pedro Ordunez-Garcia. "Health in Cuba." International Journal of Epidemiology (2006): Vol. 35, pp. 817 - 824. "Cuba." 2009. Cuban Economy. 9 July 2009 . "Cuba." 2009a. Cuban Location. 9 July 2009 . "Current Events." 2009. Vietnam ban lifted - U.S. ends trade embargo against Vietnam". 10 July 2009 . "Department of State - United States of America." 2009. TITLE XVII -- CUBAN DEMOCRACY ACT OF 1992. 9 July 2009 . Glass, Andrew. "Politico." 3 February 2008. Clinton ends Vietnam trade embargo on Feb. 3, 1994. 10 July 2009 . Greenhouse, Steven. "The New York Times." 28 January 1994. SENATE URGES END TO U.S. EMBARGO AGAINST VIETNAM. 10 July 2009 . "HG.org." 2009. Trade Law - International Trade Law - Guide to International Trade Law. 10 July 2009 . Horowitz, Irving Louis. Chapter 30 - Military Origin and Evolution of the Cuban Revolution in Horowitz I.L. and Suchlicki J. (eds) "Cuban Communism - 9th Edition" . Transaction Publishers, 1998. "International Trading." 2009. International Trade. 10 July 2009 . Kirkpatrick, Anthony F. "Role of the USA in shortage of food and medicine in Cuba." The Lancet (1996): Vol. 348, No. 9040, pp. 1489 - 1491. Prevost, Gary. "Reflections on the Cuban Revolution." Latin American Perspectives (2009): Vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 138 - 139. Smith, Wayne. "Cuba." Foreign Policy in Focus (1997): Vol. 2, No. 8. Spiegel, Jerry M. "Commentary: Daring to learn from a good example and break the ‘Cuba taboo’." International Journal of Epidemiology (2006): Vol. 35, pp. 825 - 826. Sullivan, Mark P. "Cuba: Issues for the 109th Congress." 2005. "This Day in History." 3 February 1994. Clinton ends trade embargo of Vietnam. 10 July 2009 . Thomas, Hugh. Cuba: The United States and Batista, 1952 - 1958. In Horowitz I.L. and Suchlicki J. (Eds) "Cuban Communism - 9th Edition". Transaction Publishers, 1998. Total Number of Words: 1,516 Read More