Cuban Embargo
American-Cuban Sanctions
Implications for the Future
The United States has a long and complicated history with Cuba that dates back over 100 years (Ciment 1115). The United States assumed occupancy over Cuba after defeating the Spanish at the end of the 1898 Spanish-American War. Cuba became an independent country in 1902, although the United States continued to delegate power and control over Cuba's affairs through the Piatt Amendment. Supervised elections began in 1909, but in 1952 dictator Fulgencio Batista y Zaldivar was elected which changed the political climate of the country. Batista soon proved to be a true enemy of the Cuban people with many corrupt policies and unfair political maneuvers. He was eventually driven out by Fidel Castro in 1959.
Castro's rise to power could not be considered friendly or in the best interest of peaceful relations between Cuba and the United States. In addition to the mistreatment of the Cuban people, Castro assumed domination over all U.S. owned businesses in the country in 1960, leading to a break in diplomacy with America and paving the way for the 1962 trade embargo that still persists today (Zelikow 317).
The United States hoped that the restriction on foreign exchange would help end Cuban communism; however, the effect was quite opposite. Prior to the embargo, nearly 75% of Cuba's foreign trade had been with America ("Cuba: U.S. Moves to Change" 4). Rather than comply under the embargo, Castro simply turned to other trade partners and alternative markets (Durand and Mike 35). Specifically, Cuba turned to the United States' foremost rival in the Cold War -- the Soviet Union -- which was interpreted as a threat by the American government (Padgett et al. 62).
The Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961, backed by then U.S. President John F. Kennedy, sent a strong message to Fidel Castro. The charge was carried out by Cuban exiles who opposed the dictator. The faction ultimately lost and the move only encouraged Castro's hostility by prompting him to formally declare Cuba as a communist country and Soviet ally (Rumbaut and Rumbaut 132). The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis further added to the hostility and division between America and Cuba.
The trade embargo against Cuba continues today, although a series of small adjustments and amendments have been made over the years (Padgett et al. 62). U.S. presidents across both political parties have continued to support Cuban sanctions. Bill Clinton instituted the Helms- Burton Act in 1996 which sought to penalize foreign companies that engage in relations with Cuba (LaFranchi 4). The move was designed to place economic hardships on Cuba's business partners by limiting their ability to also do business with the United States, but it set off hostile reactions from Cuban citizens and negative global perceptions of America's intentions (Smith 19). Clinton did other things to attempt to promote progress with Cuba in the mid-1990s -- more lenient travel guidelines, increased arts and cultural exchanges, sports initiatives, and better communications (Becker 5). However, the fact that the over-arching legislation did not change was considered by Cubans (and even many Americans) to be a re-enforcement of historical resentments and unwillingness to move past the days of the Cold War.
Today, there exists a very strong and powerful Cuban lobby group in Florida that supports all Cuban sanctions (LaFranchi 4). However, sentiments towards Cuba appear to be changing. Communism is no longer the intense threat it once was and many sanctions are now being re-evaluated for their merit, significance and relevance (Ciment 1115). The Obama administration has already made some travel and the ability to send monetary support to Cuban relatives much easier than in years past. Even these small steps towards social change and reforms in diplomacy have been met with heavy criticism and resistance from opposing political groups and the Florida-based Cuban lobby.
This paper examines the relevance of Cuban sanctions today given shifting political climates in both countries. With United States political strategies moving away from the days of the Cold War, there is a greater outcry than ever before to put an end to Cuban sanctions (Jenalia 12). There are many debatable issues related...
Comparing a blockade to the first option (air-strike) was a no-brainer. First of all, a guarantee of the airstrike being effective was highly unlikely. At the time, the pinpoint weaponry employed by the present day United States was not available, and in fact such weaponry had not even been invented yet. The Soviet Union, of course, knew that such a course of direction would not be effective and therefore the
Those officials who did look at the question of Japanese intentions decided that Japan would never attack, because to do so would be irrational. Yet what might seem irrational to one country may seem perfectly logical to another country that has different goals, values, and traditions. (Kessler 98) The failures apparent in the onset of World War II and during the course of the war led indirectly to the creation
Political Leadership in 20th Century America The United States is an established 'superpower' nation of the world in the turn of 20th century. In the 20th century American society, numerous events had led to the creation of the American image, where the country played a significant role in influencing and affecting decisions in domestic and international politics. In America, the President plays the essential role of analyzing and deciding on solutions
S., become attracted to the U.S. And flee the country. Cuba certainly needs to prevent a brain drain at all costs. It could do so by encouraging the U.S. To invest in its infrastructure and for U.S. doctors to train and learn at Cuban facilities, which, by all accounts, have some of the highest standards of excellence in the world (Schoultz, 2010, 8). By helping to build up the Cuban
The major participants in the Cuban Missile Crisis were in many ways driven by intelligence information to make the decisions upon which the crisis centered. The Soviet Union and its puppet nation Cuba relied on the heavy detail they received from their own agencies and believed that as a result of the failure and humiliation of the U.S. during the infamous Bay of Pigs incident that America would be blind
There were arguments that the U.S. had vital interests in maintaining control over the canal due to the need to move warships and submarines through the locks during world crises. Others cited the Soviet nuclear threat and wondered if giving the canal back to Panama would open the door for Soviet influence in the region. And there was the "psychological penalty of a pull-out" (147); giving the canal back
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now