Frank Calzon. Published Friday, April 13, 2001 .
Miami Herald
The campaign to lift the U.S. embargo against Fidel Castro has resumed.
Central Europeans believe that radio broadcasts and solidarity with the
dissidents were important but that Western loans and tourism propped up their
communist regimes, which otherwise would have collapsed much earlier.
U.S. agro-business believes that there are huge profits to be made by
trading with Castro and that Cuban trade will open the way to profitable trade
with the likes of Libya and Iraq as well.
Last year, Congress lifted sanctions on sales of agricultural products and
medicine to Cuba. No sales have materialized. One reason why they haven't is
Castro. He suspended payments on his foreign debt in 1986 but wants U.S.
taxpayers to subsidize trade with Cuba with credits and export insurance.
A CREDIT RISK
Though Castro expropriated U.S. and Cuban businesses in the 1960s, the Cuban
dictator keeps the trade pressure, telling U.S. businessmen that they're losing
deals.
The U.S. International Trade Commission estimates that absent sanctions,
``U.S. exports to Cuba . . . based on average 1996-98 trade data, would have
been less than 0.5 percent of total U.S. exports.'' Also, that ``U.S. imports
from Cuba, excluding sugar [U.S. sugar imports are government-regulated] would
have been approximately $69 million to $146 million annually, or less than 0.5
percent of total U.S. imports.''
The report, requested by U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., an opponent of
sanctions, says: ``U.S. wheat exports to Cuba could total between $32 million
and $52 million annually, representing about 1 percent of recent U.S wheat
exports.''
More instructive are the experiences of other countries:
France recently withheld a shipment of grain and canceled $160 million in
credits because Castro hasn't paid for earlier shipments.
Chile is attempting to establish ``a payment plan'' for $20 million worth
of fish shipped to Cuba last year.
South Africa, according to The Johannesburg Sunday Times, is ``frustrated''
by Havana's failure to settle a $13 million debt and will not approve new credit
guarantees until the debt is settled.
Castro's Western creditors (Canadians, French, Spanish, etc.) currently are
attempting to recover loans amounting to more than $10 billion. Havana refuses
to repay loans even to Moscow, insisting that Cuba's debt is owed to the Soviet
Union, ``a country that no longer exists.''
BEST-KEPT SECRET
One of the best-kept secrets about the U.S. embargo is that it has saved
millions for U.S. taxpayers. Due to the embargo, there are no American banks in
the ``Paris Club,'' a consortium of Cuba creditors. Otherwise, U.S. banks and
their congressional allies now would be hitting U.S. taxpayers to cover their
losses in Cuba.
According to the trade-commission report, rice exports to Cuba would be
worth $40 million to $59 million, increasing the value of U.S. rice exports from
4 to 6 percent. ``U.S. exporters would be highly competitive with current
suppliers,'' it says, but then it cautions that Castro's trade decisions are
based on politics, not on economic efficiency.
In plain words, Castro is unlikely to give U.S. farmers the market share of
his ideological allies -- China and Vietnam.
U.S. agro- businesses should not assume that `selling' to Havana is
synonymous with `getting paid.'
Castro's trade partners become apologists for the regime, fearful of
anything that could endanger their investments. They have learned the hard way.
Louisiana rice and Illinois wheat producers should not assume that
``selling'' to Havana is synonymous with ``getting paid.'' U.S. taxpayers should
be wary. Castro desperately needs credits and subsidies, and Washington is being
pressured to provide them.
If the Bush administration begins to subsidize trade with Cuba -- estimated
at $100 million a year -- five years from now, U.S. taxpayers could be holding,
or paying off, a $500 million tab. That's real money.
Frank Calzón is executive director of the Center for a Free Cuba, a
nonpartisan organization dedicated to the promotion of human rights in Cuba.
Copyright 2001 Miami Herald |