For nearly fifty years the United States have shut out an island that is ninety miles from American soil. Of all the Presidential candidates this election, Barack Obama has come the closest to saying he would extend an olive branch to Cuba by having face-to-face talks with Cuban leader Raul Castro. But he falls short of ending this destructive embargo against the Cuban people. Fidel Castro wrote an editorial critical of Obama but also reaching out to Obama as a great hope for Cuba. It is clear that Castro understands American politics and knows that his best hope is Obama.
HAVANA (AP) — Former President Fidel Castro says Sen. Barack Obama’s plan to maintain Washington’s trade embargo against Cuba will cause hunger and suffering on the island.
In a column published Monday by government-run newspapers, Castro said Obama was “the most-advanced candidate in the presidential race,” but noted that he has not dared to call for altering U.S. policy toward Cuba.
“Obama’s speech can be translated as a formula for hunger for the country,” Castro wrote, referring to Obama’s remarks last week to the influential Cuban American National Foundation in Miami.
We need to end the diplomatic freeze against Cuba. The fact that Obama has said he would meet with Raul Castro is an important first step, but it needs to be pursued toward “full diplomatic relations.” The argument that they are a Communist country no longer holds water. That shipped passed long ago when we recognized the USSR many years ago and currently have full relations with, yes, Communist China, although few refer to it that way anymore. China has in fact become an important ally with the United States.
So why the paranoia about Cuba. I am convinced, and it is not based on any evidence I have found, that had Nixon finished his second-term in office, he would have taken the next logical step and recognized Cuba too. It took a life-long Commie basher like President Richard Nixon to open the doors to the old USSR and China. Nixon had his personal demons and had self-destructive tendencies, but I grudgingly admit that he a was simply brilliant analyst and policy-maker when it came to world affairs and understanding how the world fit together.
So if a Commie-hating Republican like Nixon could seize the historical moment when he open the doors to the USSR and China, then it is difficult for me to understand the missed opportunities of Jimmy Carter, who didn’t open the doors to Cuba in his four years, or the missed opportunities of Bill Clinton during his eight years when he failed to open the doors to Cuba. Presidents like Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and George Bush never had a vision of the world, so I would not have expected them to open the doors to Cuba.
I have high hopes that Barack Obama, should he become the next President, will right this grievous wrong against the Cuban people. John McCain, should he be elected, would continue the stale foreign policies of his Republican predecessors Reagan, Bush and Bush.
The policy seems to be that when the Castro passes on, we’ll think about opening the doors. But we are not punishing Fidel and Raul Castro in our failure to do the right thing. We are punishing the great people of Cuba. We are depriving them of basic needs and that is inhumane. We should be ashamed of our policies. Cuba is hardly a security threat the the United States. But I would be willing to bet if they were a military threat to the United States, we might be more willing to sit across the table from the Cubans.
I hope and pray that the next President of the United States brings humanity back to the world stage. Cuba would be a great start. Reading on Walden Bookstore.
Filed under: Barack Obama, Blogs, Commentary, Democrats, Election 2008, Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Politics, Republicans | Tagged: Cuba, Fidel Castro, Raul Castro
I think it’s now time for US to set aside its hypocrisy by recognizing Cuba. Every country, including Cuba, also has a right to self determination and a right to have its own ideology be it communism or whatever. The US respecting these rights is affirming what it boasts of — a bastion of democracy and a protector of human rights.
“self-determination”; what a laugh! Ask the jailed opposition how much self-determination exists in Cuba.
The collection of tinpot, power-grabbing socialists, outright dictators, and terrorist finanaciers who are ‘endorsing’ Obama continues to grow. So does the collection of those that have been on America’s side for decades that have expressed their horror at his foreign policy concepts.
I’m sure Obama is close to getting the all-important Mugabe endorsement in Zimbabwe as well.
It is true that Obama should consider granting Cuba some deplomatic relations to the US. Are they really communist or is it just all in the US goverments mind, that they are. Or is the fight against Fidel, who’s just given up the reign Cuba for the good of the siblings of Cuba. If the beef is Fidel then the US should no doubtly consider themselves as traitor to the so called human prosprity, for the international community.
The concept of “self determination” may vary depending on political frames. But opening the doors may teach the Cubans the proper meaning of self determination — based on the US definition. But with the doors remained closed makes the US no different from the Castro Kingdom.
I do not like Cuba’s government. I believe they are a bad country that is bent on keeping their populace in poverty and their people enslaved, more or less.
That said, there is no reason for us to not trade with them. Not only would Americans be better off by opening trade with Cuba, the Cubans themselves would be better off. With a free flow of information, the Cubans might even stage a revolt someday and overthrow their government. The Red Chinese have become more free as a result of their populace having a lot of civil unrest, probably much of it fueled by information that has come from America to inspire their people to work for freedom. If we shut off trade with China, they and us would suffer.
It is inhumane to use trade sanctions against other governments because the only people that end up suffering are the common poor people who can’t afford to miss out on trade.
Not to mention, our foreign policy has been severely hypocritical. Banning trade with Cuba while invading Grenada because of their Communist “plot” during the 80s and also giving hundreds of millions, billions even, of dollars to the Soviet Union just so they can fund Castro’s government that we refuse to trade with.
The Cuban and the American people would benefit from free trade with Cuba. Economics would see to it that resources flow to maximum efficiency and the standard of living of the people of Cuba would finally start to rise.
I agree with Lance. And to add, maybe we can take the former USSR as an example. I think the former socialist republic was even worse than Cuba. Remember Gulag and the KGB operations? But, look at them today. To note, all just started with the opening of communications and the cold war ice melted. Now US and Russia and the rest of the Commonwealth/former members of the confederation are happily trading with each other. (With some problems, of course, particularly for minorities wanting to gain sovereignty. These are internal problems, of course.) Not only that, even thought it’s just inch by inch at least the former state socialist country is now moving towards democracy. Though their elections are still “full of loopholes” in the eyes of other democracies, at least the concept of having a “popular elections” is already there. Thus, if this is possible with USSR, the archenemy of US and has a highly sophisticated weaponry and nuclear systems, how much more Cuba which is but a pinkie compared to the former socialist republic?
Unless of course the US is soooo afraid of this little pinkie.
In the case of any group of individuals “Seeking to bring about a change in their governmental structure”, it doesn’t matter what country you belong to, you are risking adverse reaction.
Case in Point, the early Americans could have avoided the Revolutionary war if they wished to subject to British Rule. Who is to say we had any right to form our own Country? The only thing that can be said is we were willing to die for the cause we believed in. So too are the oppressed people in other nations. They are free to resist or subject the same as we were.
If I had a wife and children and was living in (name your oppressive country), I would tow the line too.