So President Obama has opened the gates to American travel and business in Cuba, at least in part. The specifics of the new policies allow both accredited religious and educational institutions to sponsor travel to Cuba, as well as opening the possibility of sending small remittances for religious or economic reasons. Given the USA’s policy history with Cuba, it is not surprising that there is a good deal of criticism of this change in policy. The intent of the policy, of course, is to engender a sense of appreciation in the Cuban people for American generosity. The actual effect - as the author of the article, Michael O’Connor, describes - could boil down to increased monetary support for the Castro government, through now legal transactions to low-level officers and party members.
How could President Obama have prepared this policy better? One major way would be more effective targeting. Many Cuban exiles in the United States are vehemently against any sort of positive engagement with Castro’s Cuba, which means that while Obama could possibly be creating positive feelings in Cuba, he is losing out on the home front. The most generous donations and expeditions to Cuba will, of course, be sympathetic to Castro’s regime, something that rankles anti-Castro Cubans and politicians alike. Since this piece of Public Diplomacy is intended to bridge the gap between the two nations (in a democratic, Pro-USA manner), it is perhaps already going off the rails. In many ways, this is a continuation of the United States' failure to understand effective Public Diplomacy. It is not enough to simply open the gates to the American market and expect that the business flowing to the new location will bring American Democracy with it. Certainly, the failure to address the concerns of Cubans living in the US, as well as ignoring their experience with the cultural, political, and interpersonal ties of Cubans and Cuba-oriented organizations was a mistake.
I wish he would've opened it up to recreational travel. I hate my government telling me where I can and can't go.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with Conor on that one--why should I not be able to go to Cuba? I have an arts background and have spent a lot of time in (formerly communist) Angola, where I learned much more about Cuban people, politics, dance and music, and it all intrigues me and I'd like to learn more. Why shouldn't I be able to go Cuba and take some dance classes there, in the same way that I might go to Argentina and learn to do the tango?
ReplyDeleteThat's my case, but why shouldn't church groups and academics be able to go over and have fruitful exchanges? Why should families in the U.S. and Cuba be divided, and unable to send remittances to their loved ones? Why in the world would we keep this policy up over a period of almost 50 years?? It only hurts the Cuban people, and allows Castro to fan the flame of his vehement rhetoric against this old U.S. policy.
I have to say that I have always thought that our policy with Cuba was just plain wrong, and the article cited is terribly slanted, and very conservative. As someone who would like to discover more about other peoples and cultures, I would be called a "radical leftist tourist" following this old anti-communist rhetoric and mindset if I were to want to go to Cuba. I'm not--I'm simply an open-minded traveler with a love of dance and music. Oh, and the best part is that if I were to travel to Cuba as a tourist, I would then have to reveal that in interviews for federal employment and risk getting blacklisted for any future government employment. Good God, when is that going to change?
It's an interesting question that you raise though in thinking about Obama trying to satisfy both domestic vs. foreign audiences--could his foreign policy and the way he presents it ever really satisfy both? And which one is more important? If he has to try to satisfy Cuban republicans in Florida, will he be making unreasonable policy in the eyes of his international audience? And if he revokes the old tired ban in favor of more progressive policy, will he be shooting himself in the foot by not currying favor with a Republican majority in Congress that might not reelect him in 2012?
It's such a dance, the whole foreign policy/public diplomacy thing. I thought that one of the first things that would happen when Obama came into office (speaking of Cuban foreign policy) was that Guantanamo would finally get shut down. Talk about a PD liability! Damned if you do, damned if you don't, and the whole thing has turned out to be way more complicated both on the political side, and in the nuts and bolts of aspects of resolving the issue.
I would just say that The New American article was a fascinating piece of propaganda, and I'm glad you brought it up. I just feel that we have to always perceive and address very basic human rights issues, and I think that is what Obama is trying to do with his new Cuba policy. Draconian restrictions just show how far we are behind the times. The wall fell. Let Cubans and Americans have exchanges if ideas, money, and all the rest. The Cuban people are not their leader. Hopefully a relaxation of these draconian restrictions will actually give average Cuban citizens more power and influence, not to mention better feelings about their big rich American neighbor, which wouldn't be a bad thing at all.