Truth about the travel ban
BY MAURICIO CLAVER-CARONE
www.uscubapac.com
Every day there seems to be a new effort to lift U.S. sanctions toward
Cuba, in particular the ``travel ban.'' The latest is a bill by House
Agriculture Committee Chairman Colin Peterson, of Minnesota, and U.S.
Rep. Jerry Moran, of Kansas, supposedly aimed at increasing agricultural
sales to the Castro regime. But its most dramatic provision would end
the ``travel ban.''
Tragically, the Peterson-Moran bill was introduced on the same day that
42-year-old Cuban pro-democracy leader and Amnesty International
``prisoner of conscience'' Orlando Zapata Tamayo died after an almost
three-months'-long hunger strike protesting the brutal beatings, abuses
and prison conditions he endured.
While supporters of loosening the travel ban make bold predictions and
philosophical arguments, few stick to the facts. Consider:
• There is no ban on travel to Cuba -- only a ban on taking an exotic
vacation there. The Department of Treasury's responsibility, under the
trading With the Enemy Act (TWEA), is to prohibit or regulate commercial
``transactions'' related to travel, not travel per se.
Travel to Cuba is authorized for a variety of reasons, ranging from
academic, religious and family visits to visits in support of civil
society. Tens of thousands of Americans legally travel to Cuba for these
purposes every year.
• Tourism is the main source of income for the Castro regime. Cuba's
tourism industry is operated and owned by the Cuban military, the
Ministry of the Revolutionary Armed Forces (MINFAR).
A November-December 2009 article in the U.S. Army's Military Review
magazine titled, Revolutionary management, makes the point that Cuba's
``Revolutionary Armed Forces transformed itself to one of the most
entrepreneurial, corporate conglomerates in the Americas.''
Cuba is one of the world's last remaining totalitarian, command-control
economies, alongside North Korea.
Just as the U.S. Congress recently approved sanctions on Iran's
petroleum-refining capability, which is that country's foremost source
of income, the United States has long imposed sanctions against tourism
transactions in Cuba to prevent an exponential increase in funds for the
Castro regime's repressive machinery.
Last November's military exercises by the MINFAR in Cuba were financed
by the hard currency of Canadian and European tourists. The real purpose
of those exercises wasn't, as the Cuban government stated, to prepare
against an ``ever-looming'' U.S. invasion, but, rather, to remind Cubans
of the government's ability to crush its domestic opponents.
It would be much more forthright to label legislation to lift
restrictions on tourism to Cuba as the Cuban Armed Forces Stimulus Act.
• We constantly hear the argument that tourism transactions are
permitted with other state-sponsors of terrorism, such as Iran, Sudan
and Syria, so why not with Cuba? While undoubtedly rich in culture,
Tehran, Khartoum and Damascus are not appealing tourism destinations or
easily accessible to Americans.
Cuba, with its sunny beaches and proximity, is an appealing vacation
destination for American tourists, but so, too, are many other Caribbean
islands with democratic governments. Last year, more U.S. tourists
visited Jamaica than the African continent or the Middle East. Should U.
S. policy beggar friendly democratic neighbors to court an unfriendly
repressive neighbor?
• Current U.S. policy toward Cuba has not failed. In order to label a
policy as a failure, there needs to be evidence of the success, or
likely success, of alternatives.
The fact is that almost two decades of Canadian and European tourism to
Cuba has not eased the Castro regime's repression, improved its respect
for basic human rights or helped Cuba's civil society gain any
democratic space.
Even supporters of lifting tourism sanctions concede this. At a CATO
Institute forum in December, U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, of Arizona,
recognized that ``there are no guarantees that this will bring democracy
to Cuba.''
What lifting restrictions on tourist travel will guarantee is that the
Cuban military will double its income. To spend on what? Guns to rein in
civil dissent? Technology to further censor Cubans' access to the
Internet? Intelligence assets to support anti-American activities?
The question to be answered by Peterson, Moran, Flake and other
supporters of lifting sanctions is: Do they trust the Cuban military
with an exponential rise in income?
The answer leads to only one fact, with real consequences:
For Cubans, the consequence of lifting restrictions on U.S. tourism is
more repression; for the United States, it's having financed that
repression.
Mauricio Claver-Carone is director of the U.S.-Cuba Democracy PAC and
editor of CapitolHillCubans.com.
Truth about the travel ban - Other Views - MiamiHerald.com (4 March 2010)
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/04/1512173/truth-about-the-travel-ban.html
No comments:
Post a Comment