|
Tighter travel rules won't
get U.S. what it wants in Cuba
By Jane E. Healy, The
Orlando Sentinel. Posted on Tue, Apr.
19, 2005.
HAVANA - (KRT) - To some, it's a puzzle
to figure out why the Bush administration
has tightened travel restrictions to Cuba
while at the same time loosened the trade
embargo for U.S. agriculture.
But in Cuba, I found the answer crystal
clear: The United States is trying to deny
Cuba what it wants most. And it believes
the tightened travel restrictions will give
the U.S. government more leverage in the
future - when Fidel Castro no longer is
in charge.
This is not to say that the trade embargo
is unimportant to Cuba. There are resources
such as nickel that the island-nation of
11 million would love to sell to the huge
U.S. market. Nickel can be used in a multitude
of stainless-steel products. Meanwhile,
the United States has quietly allowed agriculture
interests to sell some of their products
to Cuba.
But interest in opening up trade seems
to take a back seat in Cuba to opening up
U.S. travel. Loosening travel restrictions
for U.S. residents is what Cuba wants most.
The trade embargo is secondary. In fact,
one Cuban economist said that much of the
interest in lifting the embargo has to do
with exporting lobster. It's hard to imagine
that change could have much of an impact
in either the United States or Cuba, unless
we all go on a huge lobster binge.
The United States began severely restricting
travel to Cuba in 1962 when it imposed the
trade embargo after the Soviet missile crisis.
Since then, travel has been limited mostly
to journalists, church groups, academics
and Cuban-Americans with families on the
island.
But last July that changed significantly.
Cuban-Americans had been allowed to visit
their extended families - including aunts,
uncles and cousins - once a year. The Bush
administration's new rules changed that
to once every three years and only to immediate
family members. Even restrictions on journalists
and academics tightened. I - along with
Orlando Sentinel Publisher Kathleen Waltz
and Editor Charlotte Hall - was allowed
in because the paper has a news bureau there.
The effect of the latest travel crackdown
has been severe. In its first six months,
U.S. travel dropped from about 120,000 to
50,000 visitors.
But will this tightening really have the
effect the United States is seeking, other
than to deny U.S. residents travel to a
nearby Caribbean island?
I'm skeptical.
While Cubans clearly want these restrictions
eased, there are few signs that they will
collapse the Cuban economy and lead to what
the United States really wants - the toppling
of Castro. What the United States may be
ignoring is that politics - not money -
always comes first in Cuba.
In the 40-plus years since the U.S. imposed
restrictions, Cuba has shown no interest
in compromising its communist principles
for a stronger economy. Somehow, it continues
to survive in spite of the United States.
It lost the support of the Soviet Union
in the early 1990s but now enjoys a strong
relationship with Venezuela.
The latest restrictions just seem to be
one more example of a failed U.S. policy.
What the United States also is missing
is that Cuban tourism won't live or die
on Americans. Cuba gets more than 2 million
tourists a year, mostly from Canada and
Europe. So while losing 70,000 Americans
hurt, it was not catastrophic and certainly
not something that will get Castro to change
his ways.
Meanwhile, U.S. citizens are denied a travel
opportunity, and Cuban families simply wanting
to visit their relatives are hardest hit
of all.
U.S. officials seem to think that Cuba
could not absorb an influx of U.S. tourists.
But the island has plenty of available hotel
rooms - 42,000, a hefty number. And apparently
plenty of vacancies, at least in low season.
Orlando, by comparison, has 113,000 hotel
rooms for 40 million annual tourists.
And the quality of hotels? While it may
be uneven, there are luxury hotels on the
island, particularly in Varadero, a sprawling,
attractive beach-resort area with 21,000
hotel rooms. Rates are far lower than other
Caribbean islands.
If convinced by nothing else, U.S. officials
should consider that opening up travel would
give Americans a first-hand look at a repressive
dictatorship. They would see a nation with
no free press and no private property. That
would be an education in itself.
ABOUT THE WRITER
Jane E. Healy is editorial-page
editor of the Orlando Sentinel. Readers
may write to her at the Orlando Sentinel,
633 North Orange Ave., Orlando, Fla. 32801,
or by e-mail at jhealy@orlandosentinel.com.
© 2005,
The Orlando Sentinel (Fla.).
| 
