CLINTON ANNOUNCES NEXT PIT-STOP ON ‘ROAD-MAP’ TO NORMALIZE RELATIONS WITH COMMUNIST CUBA

(Washington, D.C.): In an address this morning to a
Washington forum convened to discuss the need for a bipartisan
foreign policy, President Clinton ironically announced an
initiative likely to be opposed by sensible legislators from
both sides of the aisle — taking further steps toward the
normalization of relations with Fidel Castro’s Cuba. To be sure,
the Clinton Administration objects to such a characterization,
pointing to the President’s simultaneous statement that the
United States would continue to enforce the embargo against Cuba
vigorously. But the reality is that the measures announced
today in the name of encouraging the “free flow of
ideas” are intended and will have the effect of
further salami-slicing the barriers to trade, investment and
political ties with the hemisphere’s last communist dictatorship.

That this is the Clinton Administration’s real agenda should
come as no surprise to the careful observer. After all, the same
foreign policy cadre that has argued for “engagement”
with communist China, communist North Korea and communist Vietnam
have been assiduously seeking to end the impediments to
engagement with the communist regime in Havana.⁽¹⁾ And just as they
have pursued a “road-map” for improved relations with
each of the East Asian dictatorships (regrettably, adopting in
the case of the PRC and Vietnam, plans originated by the Bush
Administration), the Clinton team clearly aspires ultimately to
dismantle all the instruments currently being employed to
undermine Fidel Castro and bring about a free Cuba.

Getting from Here to Normalization

The first step in this as-yet-unacknowledged road-map was
taken in May 1995 when the Administration announced that U.S.
Customs, Coast Guard and other personnel would henceforth assist
Cuban authorities by returning those fleeing repression to the
source of that repression — Castro’s police state. Now comes the
announcement that the United States will: allow travel to Cuba
for family reunification, “educational,”
“religious” and “human rights” reasons;
permit the opening of Cuban news bureaus in the U.S. and
authorize American news organizations to open such offices in
Cuba; and allow non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to engage
in the “full array” of activities in Cuba. The
President even announced that his Administration was actually
going to start funding some such activities on the part of
NGOs.

Past experience with this sort of salami-slicing operation on
behalf of communist dictators suggests that the “ideas”
principally encouraged to “flow freely” through such
arrangements have little to do with promoting genuine democracy
and human rights. After all, the repressive regimes in
question go to great lengths to circumscribe or prevent travel,
reporting and NGO activities deemed contrary to their interests.

Bad Business

Instead, such arrangements are typically exploited to
advance the communists’ interests. Generally these
coincide with the desires of unscrupulous, short-sighted U.S.
business interests bent on exploiting the underpaid workforce of
the country in question and, in many cases, favorably disposed to
the political “stability” and labor
“discipline” promised by an authoritarian political
system. All too often, the case is packaged for American
public consumption in terms of not missing the opportunity for
the U.S. economy to benefit from the tapping of major emerging
markets.

This, in turn, creates pressure for the next step in
the road-map — allowing investment and trade while withholding
full normalization of relations. History makes clear, however,
that the net effects of these steps are to relocate jobs from
the United States, encourage still more U.S. bilateral trade
deficits and provide desperately needed financial life-support
for otherwise unsustainable regimes.

The Bottom Line

President Clinton’s road-map for Cuba is in stark contrast to
the direction taken just last month by the U.S. House of
Representatives. In approving by a bipartisan and veto-proof
margin the Libertad legislation on 21 September 1995, the House
clearly affirmed the traditional American policy of resisting —
rather than appeasing — Fidel Castro.

Congress should make absolutely clear to Mr. Clinton and
his geopolitical cartographers that their road-map is
unacceptable and will be overridden by the Libertad bill and its
various initiatives designed to make the embargo against Castro
even more effective.

(1) See the Center’s Decision Briefs
entitled First Hanoi, Now Havana? Spare Us Morton
Halperin’s Prescription for Potemkin Democracy in Cuba ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=94-D_33″>No. 94-D 33, 8 April 1994) and A
‘Splendid Little War’ for Haiti, Concessions for Castro:
‘Halbotts’ Renew the Left’s Double Standard for Dictators
(No. 94-D 92, 6 September
1994).