The Melting Of U.S. Policy Against Cuba

Jeff Greenfield Looks At Why A Decades-Long Embargo May Soon Be Ending

(CBS)  On the heels of a number of moves by the Obama administration aimed at improving relations with long-time adversary Cuba, Jeff Greenfield takes us behind the headlines ...

---

This weekend, President Obama got warm applause from other Western hemisphere leaders for both his words and his deeds, such as lifting restrictions on how many visits Cuban-Americans may make to the island, and how much money they can send there.

For his part, Cuba's Raul Castro, speaking in Venezuela Thursday (Cuba is now barred from attending the Summit of the Americas), made clear that everything is on the table.

"Human rights, freedom of the press, political prisoners, everything, everything, everything … they want to discuss, but as equals," he said.

Why is this happening? Why now? Good questions, but before we offer an answer or two, let's remind ourselves just how large this small nation has loomed over recent history.

When the 32-year-old Fidel Castro triumphantly led his forces into Havana on New Year's Day, 1959, his ascent was greeted with approval in the U.S.

But it didn't take long for Castro to align Cuba with the Soviet Union (left) … and for the United States to respond with a trade embargo and a failed attempt to invade the island in the Spring of 1961, the disastrous Bay of Pigs.

A year later, the Soviets placed nuclear missiles on the island, leading President Kennedy to issue this apocalyptic warning:

"It shall be the policy of this nation to regard the launching of any nuclear missile from Cuba against any nation in the western hemisphere as an attack of the Soviet Union on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response on the Soviet Union."

Jump ahead to 1980, the "Mariel boatlift, when Cuba released some 125,000 refugees (including many from Cuban prisons and mental asylums) that caused severe political problems for Jimmy Carter.

"In the end, the fact that the United States then had to stop this flow - having said we wouldn't turn our backs on them, and we did turn them back, stop the boats - Castro felt he had emerged from that, politically, the victor,' said diplomatic attaché Jay Taylor.

And in 2000, a presidential election may well have been decided when the Clinton administration returned a young Cuban boy named Elian Gonzales to his father after his mother drowned while fleeing to the U.S.

The Cuban exile community took out its anger on Vice President Al Gore, costing him by one estimate 50,000 votes in the decisive state of Florida - a state he officially lost by 537 ballots.

So, what's changed since then? Time, for one thing.

"The Cuban community is changing," says Dario Moreno, a professor at Florida International University in Miami. "The highly-charged emotions that you saw in the Cuban-American community in the '70s and the '80s lessened in the '90s and has continued to lessen."

The Cuban-American community, which numbers one million strong in Florida, and some 85,000 strong in New Jersey, has had a huge political impact on Democrats and Republicans alike in arguing for a no-recognition, no-trade-deals policy.

But a younger generation of Cuban-Americans has a different view - more inclined to favor travel, trade and diplomatic relations.

"Generationally, they think more like other Americans," said Moreno.

Moreover, for some Americans, the issue isn't "Red" Cuba but "green" - as in money. Conservative groups like the American Farm Bureau and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce favor a more open policy, because farmers and business folks see in Cuba a market for American goods.

To be sure, Cuban leaders themselves, who have ruled over a closed society for half a century, may have something to fear from more open relations.

"The Cubans know that lifting the embargo to increase travel and trade will pose a challenge to the regime," said Moreno, "and I think there's a question whether the regime feels strong enough to address that challenge."

But for all the challenges, the events of the past week made clear that both sides are looking for a dramatic break with the past.

Finally, for some of us, there is one overriding promise of an end to the trade embargo: The chance to come out of the shadows, and openly, legally enjoy one of that nation's finest achievements … the cigar!

As far as the politics of this goes, just look upon it as slowly setting fire to the export of a Communist dictatorship.

[zaniacloclo]

This issue is a tough one for the United States. On the one hand the Embargo has not changed anything politically there in over 40 years. So why should we keep it. On the other hand who would want to have relations with the Castro brothers. I agree that going slow on this one is a good tactic right now. Who knows. Fidel is about to die and Raul seem a litlle more pragmatic.

[Nextnik]

Fact is, the more US dollars that go into Cuba, the more likely they will want more of a connection to the US. I believe that Cuba is prime for more democratic, free market change. I think we should lift the embargo. Here is a video about the current state of affairs there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cj1YgNNLrvw&feature=channel_page

[quapawsix]

Before you accuse Cuba of human rights violations you had better look at the violation that were orchestrated by our very own government. Water boarding, Guantanamo, then we let criminals, Like Von Braun, in to the country knowing there are laws barring them and the Japanese Generals and their minions from Unit 51 because they agreed to hand over their documentation that was gather when they were using our troupes and the Chinese people ad human gene pigs. so drop the human rights violations, all governments have skeletons in their closet

[cbsantispin]

Even as a young child I always questioned why McDonalds and other Restaurants threw out food every night instead of giving it to the poor. I heard all kinds of explanations, none of which satisfied me. People die because they can't afford expensive medical treatments or medicine, there is plenty of medicine, but if you can't afford it, too bad. It's the Capitalist System we live under and in order to change things so everyone can eat and receive proper medical care we would need to move to something like a Socialist System. I understand both sides of the argument and maybe living under the sea faring rules of the ocean, if you don't work, you don't eat is the way to go, there are a lot of freeloaders looking to scam and game the system and these types make it bad for everyone who really needs a "temporary" hand up. I don't like Socialism and I don't like leaving people in dire straits either, so what's the best of both worlds, is there a middle ground?

[boandco]

Obama seems somewhat confused about political prisoners being held in Cuba. The only political prisoners, and prisoners held without trial in Cuba, are being held in Guantanamo.

[krzeaz]

Because Obama is a Marxist.