Stiffing Havana

President Obama promised to reach out to Cuba, in hopes it would encourage reform. But now that the Castro brothers are actually following through, Washington is missing in action.

BY ANYA LANDAU FRENCH | OCTOBER 19, 2010

In the high-stakes world of international diplomacy, bluffing is a seldom-seen practice -- the stakes are simply too high to risk getting called out. But, that's precisely what seems to have happened with the Obama administration's stated policy of détente toward Cuba. Havana is making concessions, but Washington seems incapable of responding in kind. The United States may be fumbling away its best chance at influencing Cuba in the way that it has claimed to have wanted for decades.

It was nearly one year ago that President Barack Obama delivered a message to President Raúl Castro via Spain's prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero: "We understand that change can't happen overnight, but down the road, when we look back at this time, it should be clear that now is when those changes began," Obama said. "We're taking steps, but if they don't take steps too, it's going to be very hard for us to continue." If Cuba proved willing to improve relations with the United States, Obama seemed willing to reciprocate.

Obama's conciliatory message may have been on Castro's mind as the Cuban government began making improvements to its much maligned human rights record this summer. More than 40 Cuban political prisoners have been released from jail in recent months. Dozens more might soon follow as part of the government's unprecedented human rights dialogue with the Cuban Catholic Church; it's the first such dialogue of its kind for the church, an institution that previously had been treated with suspicion, if not hostility, by the Cuban government. The political changes have been paired with sweeping labor and economic reforms that have, however belatedly, begun to liberalize the moribund economy: 10 percent of Cuba's workforce will shift into the private sector by next year.

The ball, clearly, is now in the United States' court. But so far, the Obama administration has failed to respond to the very concessions Washington has long demanded, and very recently promised to reward. Rather than greet the changes, Obama has replied with mild skepticism. "I think that any release of political prisoners, any economic liberalization that takes place in Cuba is positive, positive for Cuban people, but we've not yet seen the full results of these promises," Obama told Hispanic media at the White House Tuesday.

Washington and Havana remain locked in their 50-year dispute. The U.S. trade and travel embargoes have only gotten tighter over the decades; under President George W. Bush, tensions threatened to reach a tipping point. Obama has called the inherited status quo a failure, but most of the Bush policies remain in place today. (Some in Washington argue that Obama has already made significant gestures to Havana by easing restrictions on Cuban-American families' travel and remittances to the island last year. But that change was more a gesture to Cuban-Americans in Miami -- where he campaigned on a promise to ease Bush's harsher restrictions on Cuban immigrant families -- than it was any significant political concession to Havana.)

The Obama administration should instead be honoring the changes in Cuba by taking considerable steps of its own: A bold response by Washington will put the spotlight back on Havana to continue with its reforms. Obama's choice isn't between the status quo and a wholesale abandonment of the embargoes: There are many ways to craft a foreign policy that could help spur the economic growth needed to support the half-million new workers in Cuba's fledging private sector. Only Congress can lift the Cuban travel ban entirely, but the president possesses broad authority to allow some Americans to travel freely to the island. Cultural and academic trips to Cuba by Americans are currently permitted under U.S. law, at the discretion of the federal government; the Obama administration could easily broaden the definition of such "people-to-people" trips. That policy would trace its roots to the successful citizen diplomacy with the Soviet Union that President Ronald Reagan championed during the Cold War. President Bill Clinton successfully enacted such a policy toward Cuba during his time in office, but it was rolled back by Bush.

But what if Obama chooses to do nothing or dithers so long that this historic opportunity to influence Cuban reforms passes? If the president fails to move now, after Cuba has apparently acted in good faith to the offer of an outstretched hand, his administration will lose credibility --not just in Havana, but among global allies that will see the president's reversal as a sign of weakness, incoherence, and even dishonesty.

No one can say for sure, of course, where Cuba's reforms will lead. But it's clear -- even to Fidel Castro in his most unguarded moments -- that the old model just doesn't work anymore. Raúl Castro's reforms, deeper and broader than the limited Cuban reforms of the 1990s, signal that Havana is in search of a new system. It may or may not be the model America would choose, but if Washington wants to have any influence at this pivotal moment, the time to engage Cuba is now.

Getty Images

 SUBJECTS: NORTH AMERICA
 

Anya Landau French is director of the U.S.-Cuba Policy Initiative at the New America Foundation.

USAMBCUBA

11:43 PM ET

October 19, 2010

We Need More Than a Winning Argument

Anya, right now there is a select group of Americans who could not be more happier that we are stiffing Havana. The problem is U.S. Cuba relations is driven by money, mostly donated by extreme hardline Cuban Americans who want no engagement with Cuba; want travel restrictions on all Americans, and the embargo kept in place. That money has helped elect several Cuban American Congressmen, all hardliners too. Who and what do you think is driving the policy? They control this issue and the administration to great extent. It is certainly not sound reason and logic that does. If Washington DC could only work that way...but it does not. We need more than a winning policy argument. Its the politic$ that we keep losing. And until this is issue is addressed politically head-on, you will likely be among the many who will keep writing articles that make sense, are logical and reasonable. However, that will not solve the problem on U.S. Cuba relations.

 

JKOLAK

10:59 AM ET

October 20, 2010

It would be nice if someone

It would be nice if someone in the administration got this message.

 

USAMBCUBA

4:04 PM ET

October 20, 2010

They will get the message when

it is delivered to them politically... This side is all policy, no politics... That is not how the game works or is won in DC.

 

FREAK.DOM

6:07 PM ET

October 21, 2010

Give him a break

He's facing a troubled mid-term elections. If you were in his shoes, would you have submitted a divisive issue like this to a vote in Congress that could potentially unhinge the Democrats chances in key voting states like Florida and New Jersey? It's one thing to be principled, but one's gotta learn to understand that now's that the perfect time to do this. Watch out after the elections. He's actually going to do what everybody's been expecting him to about the travel ban.

 

JOHN MCAULIFF

11:40 AM ET

October 20, 2010

White House On the Spot

At this point, supporters of the Obama Administration are frustrated and disappointed by its opportunistic and cautious policy on Cuba. If it fails to deliver on non-tourist travel after the mid-term election, they, including myself, will become angry. People who have been impatiently awaiting the reopening of people-to-people channels will be increasingly inclined to disregard the paper tiger of non-enforceable travel restrictions.

It is time for the President to be as bold as Raul Castro. General licenses for all categories of non-tourist travel organized by IRS recognized non-profits will open the door to a wide range of serious visitors who will foster mutual understanding and build trust. In addition to educational and cultural programs, travel must be freed from bureaucratic regulation for religious, humanitarian, sports, policy dialog, professional conferences and support for the Cuban people purposes.

If the Administration wakes up on November 3d and wonders what happened to its mandate, it could see its failure on Cuba to be a potent symbol of the reason it has lost the enthusiasm of its base and of independents.

A modifiable letter to the White House calling for boldness on Cuba is available here http://www.change.org/petitions/view/mr_president_be_bold_on_people_to_people_travel_to_cuba

John McAuliff
Fund for Reconciliation and Development

 

USAMBCUBA

4:02 PM ET

October 20, 2010

The Administration will wake up when

this community that wants the travel restrictions lifted gets political. No exceptions to the rules of the game. Right now the Administration believes it is doing the right thing on Cuba precisely because of the politic$ that drive and control it. Why do you think the travel announcement scheduled for August got postponed until after the election? Petitions, respectfully, are the lowest regarded form of grassroots lobbying and action. Petitions are symbolic but do not drive policy.

 

IAN

12:56 PM ET

October 20, 2010

Why don't people realize...

that change can't come immediately on things like this. Even though Obama said that exact thing, when small changes that could show more changes if it proves a positive thing, Obama doesn't respond in kind. He's showing he can talk, but when it comes to actually doing something, deciding something, he leaves a lot to be desired. Seriously. Someone needs to wake him up and get him to make some decisions and decide some policies to back up his great speeches. As soon as that happens, he'll be a great president. Until then, he's looking a lot like a undecided guy thats in way over his head.

But at least he can make a killer speech.

"I think that any release of political prisoners, any economic liberalization that takes place in Cuba is positive, positive for Cuban people, but we've not yet seen the full results of these promises"...

Saying this after Cuba does something like they just did, unprecedented since Castro came to power, is, in the immortal words of that football show on ESPN, "C'mon man!"

Sometimes promises have to be responded to, even if the full results haven't been seen yet. After all, isn't responding to non-"full results" exactly what this:

"We understand that change can't happen overnight, but down the road, when we look back at this time, it should be clear that now is when those changes began"

means?

 

AARKY

6:03 PM ET

October 20, 2010

Moving the Goal posts

As with Iran, the White House and State Department just love moving the goal posts. This means that if there are concessions from the other side or they show a willingness to enter into talks, then we quickly come up with further demands, with the deliberate intent of stopping further conciliation. For years the State Department was full of the Cold War apparatchikis, whose prime directive in life was the complete isolation of Cuba. They have hatched clones who have now taken up the mission. The most recent ridiculous embargo against Iran now prohibits the importation of carpets and pistachios from Iran into the US. One of the people I knew decided to go to Cuba and it was fairly simple. He went to Mexico and then bought a round trip ticket to Havana. When he arrived , he asked them not to stamp his US passport. That way he wasn't caught by the US immigration for an illegal trip to Cuba when he returned to the US. If the Communist government of Cuba hasn't collapsed in over 50 years, it can probably hold out for another 30-40 years until someone comes to their senses.

 

JMWAVE

6:08 PM ET

October 20, 2010

More of the same

Obama has caved in to the radical politics of the Cuban-American congressional members and their Cuban Democracy PAC. No sense in joining the game. If sensible arguments and a just policy does not suffice, the people must demand change. Americans are the ones who suffer from this dismal policy. Not only are our freedoms abridged but the principle of justice affected. More practical is the loss of business and the continuos defense internationally of a defenseless policy. Great going President Obama, the US has become subservient to a handful of Cubans from Miami and New Jersey bent on revenge and profiting form an anti-Cuban industry.
Milton Sanchez-Parodi

 

USAMBCUBA

11:56 PM ET

October 20, 2010

I beg to differ

Do you know why President Obama held off on the Cuba travel announcements? Because Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (who is deep in the pockets of the embargo crowd) personally went to Rahm Emanuel and other WH staff to plead her case that liberalizing travel to Cuba would hurt the Democratic Party in Florida and turnoff donors. No one from the pro-travel side went up there to fight just as hard to keep the President to his commitments and on course. The President never heard from our side, politically that is... The day we get political is the day this insanity of a policy begins to end. We need to write less articles and start writing more checks and knocking on doors like the other side does. That is how we will win.