We don't all always have the same goals for government policy, and that is certainly true in the case of U.S.-Cuba policy. For many, the goal is the fall of the Cuban government, which is understandable. No one will say that Fidel Castro didn't do a lot of awful things, or hurt a lot of people. Fidel Castro is an old man though now, as is his brother who took over for him. They have begun to accept some market reforms, and in reality, they are less and less a threat. For that reason, a lot of people have come to realize that the correct aim shouldn't be regime change in 2014- that is an outdated goal. It's high-time that America look to have prosperous, peaceful relations with a nation 90 miles off of our border, relations that would push aggressive regimes like Russia and Venezuela away.
Even if your goal is regime change though, as clearly it is for the Washington Post, Marco Rubio, and even my former boss, Bob Melendez, the embargo policy is a failure. Rather than hanging onto a "Bay of Pigs" era strategy, understand that we're better off having normal relations with a neighboring country, doing business with them, allowing families to reunite, allowing our businesses to export goods there, and yes, having a better security arrangement, so Cuba can't be used as a launchpad for attacks on America. The embargo has failed to remove the Castro regime for over 50 years, there's no reason to hold onto it until the last Castro dies. It does nothing to help Americans here, and it does nothing to further our interests. In fact, it doesn't help the Cubans either. There's no reason to believe that because the Castros aren't at their strongest right now, the failed embargo would suddenly work. They've been weakened before. The policy failed then too.
I get that for some, it's personal. I get that the Castros were not good guys. I also see that the embargo, while well intentioned in 1963, is a failure now, and has no real purpose. We shouldn't have an aggressive policy towards a neighboring nation just because it's our status quo. If it's not working, it's time to try something else. Normalization is exactly what we need to try.
Even if your goal is regime change though, as clearly it is for the Washington Post, Marco Rubio, and even my former boss, Bob Melendez, the embargo policy is a failure. Rather than hanging onto a "Bay of Pigs" era strategy, understand that we're better off having normal relations with a neighboring country, doing business with them, allowing families to reunite, allowing our businesses to export goods there, and yes, having a better security arrangement, so Cuba can't be used as a launchpad for attacks on America. The embargo has failed to remove the Castro regime for over 50 years, there's no reason to hold onto it until the last Castro dies. It does nothing to help Americans here, and it does nothing to further our interests. In fact, it doesn't help the Cubans either. There's no reason to believe that because the Castros aren't at their strongest right now, the failed embargo would suddenly work. They've been weakened before. The policy failed then too.
I get that for some, it's personal. I get that the Castros were not good guys. I also see that the embargo, while well intentioned in 1963, is a failure now, and has no real purpose. We shouldn't have an aggressive policy towards a neighboring nation just because it's our status quo. If it's not working, it's time to try something else. Normalization is exactly what we need to try.
0 comments:
Post a Comment