For the past five decades, aggressive political differences between Cuba and the United States have led to the preservation and continued support of a decades-old trade embargo with the island. Its imposition in 1962 was mainly a reprisal towards the new communist-led revolutionary government aimed at weakening their economy and thus, hopefully, their ability to stay in power. However, with signs of change emerging within the island, leaving the trade embargo in place might only delay — or prevent — the regeneration of a new Cuba free of erroneous and unsustainable socialist structures. The U.S. Congress should let go of the past and re-establish a strong economic relationship with Cuba by lifting the embargo.
President Obama and Cuban President Raul Castro, despite disagreements on issues such as human rights, both share the same view on lifting the embargo. Castro assures us Cuba and the U.S. could make significant progress on their shared agendas if the embargo were lifted by Congress. The view of many House Republicans that Cuba remains a threat to the United States is not only outdated, but also senseless. If anything, an open Cuba would be a source of wealth for the United States and other countries — not a threat.
While the recent success of the White House in lifting various financial and travel restrictions and the reestablishment of political diplomacy has signaled the start of a new era for Cuba, the Cuban people still face the oppressive economic restrictions that limit their productivity and investment opportunities.
As a result of the embargo, Cuban farmers, which make up one of the most productive sectors of the economy, lack access to the capital needed to update outdated tools and refine processing plants. This is one of many examples of how the embargo is affecting Cuban entrepreneurial spirits that want to achieve progress for themselves and their businesses.
Investors throughout the United States have been mobilizing for the past couple of years, waiting for an opportunity to capitalize on a relatively untapped, isolated market that has been closed for decades. Many have established research teams, with some going door-to-door to Cuban households, tracking recipients of financial remittances to locate “clusters of purchasing power.” Some analysts suggest Cuba has the potential to reach an economy of $350 billion within 15 years. Opening the doors to these investors would inject the Cuban economy with huge amounts of capital and resources otherwise unaccessible by Cuban businesses.
Worries of an open Cuba also stem from communist control of the island. Investors may be hesitant to put their money on Cuba because of the uncertainty on whether they will be protected. Private property is one of the foundations on which capitalism is built — without any form of private property protection policies in place, the island might not reap as many benefits, even without the embargo.
However, the Cuban government has begun to recognize the need to reevaluate its economic structures and priorities. In 2010, the government announced the furlough of 500,000 state employees and the expansion of private employment. A year later, the National Assembly approved economic reforms aimed at encouraging private enterprise and reducing state bureaucracy. The Cuban government has slowly shifted its focus from an “excessively paternalistic, idealistic, and egalitarian approach” toward a more sustainable and productive economic approach.
Yet Cubans must tread carefully. Opening the doors to such a powerful source of capital and investment might turn the island into a playground for franchises and compromise much of the social progress it has achieved throughout the years. Prioritizing local entrepreneurship and promoting Cuban economic interests ahead of foreign ones should be among the government’s top priorities. If the right institutions aren’t in place when the embargo lifts, Cuba risks going back to the economic dependence on the United States it has historically struggled with.
International opinion of the United States’ economic blockade towards Cubans isn’t popular, either. Last October, the 193-member United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution condemning the embargo for the 24th consecutive year (this time with a 191-2 vote). However, Congress has refused to act on the issue. Such a widespread disapproval toward a U.S. policy should be of concern to those who care about the values we promote abroad.
Led by Fidel Castro, Cuba has achieved significant advances in education, healthcare and “spiritual wealth” (as Castro puts it) throughout the past six decades. However, after 57 years of communist power, Cubans seem to be caring less about “spiritual wealth” and more about their economic well-being. The United States would do well in lifting the embargo, marking the beginning of a new era of mutually beneficial economic, political and social progress between the two nations.
Carlos Lopez is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at c.lopez@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
KURTZWEIL: The truth about nuclear power in Northern Virginia
By Paul Kurtzweil | 4 hours agoYoungkin is trying to entice data centers to move to Northern Virginia for his own political gain, and presenting this to the taxpayer as a service to the citizen is deceiving.
CASTAGNO: One year later — a local zoning ordinance proves its worth
By Conall Costagno | 2 days agoIn its current situation, Charlottesville is an early adopter of the upzoning movement, giving the City the unique opportunity to act as a shining example of its benefits.
RASHID: Club exclusivity hurts the student body
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | 5 days agoWe need to reconsider how we think about extracurriculars — this hyper-competitive and exclusive culture which implicitly frames clubs as resume-padders must be stopped.
