Measure Strengthens Castro, Hurts American.
Editorial. Published Friday, June 30, 2000, in the Miami Herald
President Clinton posed the right question on Wednesday when asked whether he would sign the bill allowing U.S. food sales to Cuba: ``Will [this] be a net plus in terms of our strategy, which is to reach out to the Cuban people without supporting the Cuban government?''
No, it won't. If the bill reaches his desk he should veto it. The measure not only would undermine existing U.S. policy by strengthening the repressive hand of the Cuban government, it handcuffs the presidency and limits the freedom of American citizens. He should veto the bill because:
Although passionately sought by the U.S. agri-business lobby, it is a hoax on farmers. Fact is that, without generous financing from the U.S. government -- which remains illegal -- the destitute Cuban government will lack the cash to buy more than token amounts. Even Ricardo Alarcon, president
of Cuba's rump parliament, complained that the bill won't stimulate sales to Cuba.
Keeping the U.S. embargo fully in place forces Cuba to spend its cash reserves to buy more costly food from other countries. The bill would undo this. And the more the Cuban government must spend on food, the less it has to finance the repression of its people.
The bill would bar the president from using food sales as a tool to punish Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Libya, Sudan and perhaps other rogue nations. Not selling food to people who mistreat or threaten Americans may seem harsh, but it may lead to corrective action short of waging war -- which is
even more harsh.
It would deprive all but a select few Americans of their abilty to travel without restrictions. Currently those restrictions exist because of a presidential order that could be lifted at any time. This bill would take away a president's ability to do that and writes into the law a ban on Cuba
travel.
Americans must have the right to travel where they please except under the most dire circumstances. Granted, by lifting the travel ban to Cuba, American tourists might flood the island and pour dollars into Cuba's coffers.
But we believe that the benefit Fidel Castro gains from tourism would be more than offset by myriad contacts ordinary Cubans would have with ordinary Americans. Realistically, neither an embargo nor unrestricted travel is apt to topple the Castro regime. But the former at least deprives the
Cuban state of money it might otherwise use to fuel its repressive machinery; the latter forges bonds that will ease Cuba's transition to democracy after Castro's departure.
The tools to implement an effective Cuba policy are already in Mr. Clinton's hands. He should veto the bill and lift the travel ban.
Copyright 2000 Miami Herald |