United States Embargo Against Cuba - Critiques of Embargo Laws and Rules

Critiques of Embargo Laws and Rules

The UN General Assembly has passed several resolutions against the US embargo on Cuba.

year	date	resolution number	link	for	against	abstention	voting against
1992	Nov. 24	47/19 (The 19th resolution of the 47th session of the UN General Assembly)	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/023/86/IMG/NR002386.pdf	59	2	71	U.S., Israel
1993	November 3	48/18	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/711/00/IMG/NR071100.pdf	88	4	57	U.S., Israel, Albania, Paraguay
1994	Oct. 26	49/9	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N94/600/51/PDF/N9460051.pdf	101	2	48	U.S., Israel
1995	November 2	50/10	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N95/256/76/PDF/N9525676.pdf	117	3	38	U.S., Israel, Uzbekistan
1996	Nov. 12	51/17	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N96/774/91/PDF/N9677491.pdf	138	3	25	U.S., Israel, Uzbekistan
1997	October	52/10	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N97/775/75/PDF/N9777575.pdf	143	3	17	U.S., Israel, Uzbekistan
1998	October	53/4	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N98/774/91/PDF/N9877491.pdf	157	2	12	U.S., Israel
1999	November	54/21	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N99/775/45/PDF/N9977545.pdf	155	2	8	U.S., Israel
2000	November	55/20	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N00/560/59/PDF/N0056059.pdf	167	3	4	U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands
2001	November	56/9	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N01/475/62/PDF/N0147562.pdf	167	3	3	U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands
2002	November	57/11	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N02/538/55/PDF/N0253855.pdf	173	3	4	U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands
2003	November	58/7	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N03/453/33/PDF/N0345333.pdf	179	3	2	U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands
2004	October	59/11	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N04/476/86/PDF/N0447686.pdf	179	4	1	U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau
2005	November	60/12	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N05/488/26/PDF/N0548826.pdf	182	4	1	U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau
2006	November	61/11	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N06/495/09/PDF/N0649509.pdf
2007	October	62/3	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N07/463/95/PDF/N0746395.pdf
2008	October	63/7	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N08/471/21/PDF/N0847121.pdf
2009	October	64/6	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N09/462/19/PDF/N0946219.pdf
2010	October	65/6	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N10/512/90/PDF/N1051290.pdf
2011	October	66/6	http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N11/459/18/PDF/N1145918.pdf

"Future students of American history will be scratching their heads about this case for decades to come. Our embargo and refusal to normalize diplomatic relations has nothing to do with communism. Otherwise, we wouldn't have had diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union throughout the Cold War, with China since Nixon, and with Vietnam despite our bitter war there. No, Cuba was pure politics. Though it started out to be a measure of an administration's resistance to Castro's politics, it very soon became a straight-jacket whereby first-generation Cuban-Americans wielded inordinate political power over both parties and constructed a veto over rational, mature diplomacy."

— Gary Hart, former U.S. Senator, March 2011

The embargo has been criticized for its effects on food, clean water, medicine, and other economic needs of the Cuban population. Criticism has come from both Fidel Castro and Raúl Castro, citizens and groups from within Cuba, and international organizations and leaders including Barack Obama. Some academic critics, outside Cuba, have also linked the embargo to shortages of medical supplies and soap which have resulted in a series of medical crises and heightened levels of infectious diseases. It has also been linked to epidemics of specific diseases, including neurological disorders and blindness caused by poor nutrition. Travel restrictions embedded in the embargo have also been shown to limit the amount of medical information that flows into Cuba from the United States. An article written in 1997 suggests malnutrition and disease resulting from increased food and medicine prices have affected men and the elderly, in particular, due to Cuba's rationing system which gives preferential treatment to women and children.

On May 1, 2009, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez voiced his concern over the continued embargo. While speaking about his meeting U.S. President Barack Obama at a summit days earlier, Chávez stated "if President Obama does not dismantle this savage blockade of the Cuban people, then it is all a lie, it will all be a great farce and the U.S. empire will be alive and well, threatening us."

"The embargo is the perfect example used by anti-Americans everywhere to expose the hypocrisy of a superpower that punishes a small island while cozying to dictators elsewhere." — Moisés Naím, Newsweek

The Helms-Burton Act has been the target of criticism from Canadian and European governments in particular, who object to what they say is the extraterritorial pretensions of a piece of legislation aimed at punishing non-U.S. corporations and non-U.S. investors who have economic interests in Cuba. In the Canadian House of Commons, Helms-Burton was mocked by the introduction of the Godfrey-Milliken Bill, which called for the return of property of United Empire Loyalists seized by the American government as a result of the American Revolution (the bill never became law). The European Council has stated that it:

while reaffirming its concern to promote democratic reform in Cuba, recalled the deep concern expressed by the European Council over the extraterritorial effects of the "Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Libertad) Act" adopted by the United States and similar pending legislation regarding Iran and Libya. It noted the widespread international objections to this legislation. It called upon President Clinton to waive the provisions of Title III and expressed serious concern at the measures already taken to implement Title IV of the Act. The Council identified a range of measures which could be deployed by the EU in response to the damage to the interests of EU companies resulting from the implementation of the Act. Among these are the following:

1. a move to a WTO dispute settlement panel;
2. changes in the procedures governing entry by representatives of US companies to EU Member States;
3. the use/introduction of legislation within the EU to neutralize the extraterritorial effects of the US legislation;
4. the establishment of a watch list of US companies filing Title III actions.

Some critics argue that the embargo actually helps Fidel and Raul Castro more than it hurts them, by providing a scapegoat to blame for all of Cuba's problems. Hillary Clinton has publicly shared the view that the embargo helps the Castros, noting that "It is my personal belief that the Castros do not want to see an end to the embargo and do no want to see normalization with the United States." Clinton said in the same interview that "we're open to changing with them," though the US government maintains its strong stance in support of the embargo while the Castros continue to oppose it.

George P. Shultz, who served as Secretary of State under Reagan, has gone as far as to call the continued embargo "insane". Daniel Griswold, director of the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, criticized the current policy in June 2009 by stating:

"The embargo has been a failure by every measure. It has not changed the course or nature of the Cuban government. It has not liberated a single Cuban citizen. In fact, the embargo has made the Cuban people a bit more impoverished, without making them one bit more free. At the same time, it has deprived Americans of their freedom to travel and has cost US farmers and other producers billions of dollars of potential exports."

Some American business leaders openly call for an end to the embargo. They argue, as long as the embargo continues, non-U.S. foreign businesses in Cuba that violate the embargo, do not have to compete with U.S. businesses, and thus, will have a head start when and if the embargo is lifted.

José Azel, a Senior Research Associate at the Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American Studies, University of Miami and the author of the recently published book, Mañana in Cuba (Tomorrow in Cuba) presents an opposing perspective:

"Currently over 190 nations engage economically and politically with Cuba while the United States remains alone in enforcing its economic sanctions policy. If indeed U.S. policy is deemed as one case of failure to change the nature of the Cuban government, there are 190 cases of failure on the same grounds. By a preponderance of evidence (190 to 1) the case can be made that engagement with that regime has been a dismal failure."

Some religious leaders oppose the embargo for a variety of reasons, including humanitarian and economic hardships the embargo imposes on Cubans. Pope John Paul II called for the end to the embargo during his 1979 pastoral visit to Mexico. However, during his January 1998 visit to Cuba, Pope John Paul II delivered his most powerful attack against President Fidel Castro's government, urging the Roman Catholic Church to take "courageous and prophetic stands in the face of the corruption of political or economic power" and to promote human rights within Cuba. Patriarch Bartholomew I called the embargo a "historic mistake" while visiting the island on January 25, 2004. A joint letter in 1998 from the Disciples of Christ and the United Church of Christ to the U.S. Senate called for the easing of economic restrictions against Cuba. While also opposing the embargo, the General Secretary of the National Council of Churches stated, "We did not understand the depth of the suffering of Christians under communism. And we failed to really cry out under the communist oppression." Rev. Jesse Jackson, Rev. Al Sharpton, and Minister Louis Farrakhan have also publicly opposed the embargo. On May 15, 2002 former President Jimmy Carter spoke in Havana, calling for an end to the embargo, saying "Our two nations have been trapped in a destructive state of belligerence for 42 years, and it is time for us to change our relationship." The US bishops called for an end to the embargo on Cuba, after Pope Benedict XVI's 2012 visit to the island.

The United Nations General Assembly has condemned the embargo as a violation of international law every year since 1992. Israel, despite ranking as one of Cuba's leading trading partners (and thus a violator of the Helms-Burton Act), is the only country that routinely joins the U.S. in voting against the resolution as has Palau every year since 2004 to 2008. On October 26, 2010, for the 19th time, the General Assembly condemned the embargo, 187 to 2 with 3 abstentions. Israel sided with the U.S., while Marshall Islands, Palau and Micronesia abstained.

The Foreign Minister of the Republic of Cuba, Perez Roque called the embargo "an act of genocide". Cuba has also denounced as "theft" the use of frozen Cuban assets to pay for lawsuits filed in the US against the Republic of Cuba.

In addition to the Cuban authorities, film director Michael Moore has also challenged the embargo by bringing 9/11 rescue workers in need of health care to Cuba to obtain subsidized health care.

In June 2011, former Democratic presidential candidate George McGovern spoke out against the travel ban before visiting Cuba, remarking:

"It's a stupid policy. There's no reason why we can't be friends with the Cubans, and vice versa. A lot of them have relatives in the United States, and some Americans have relatives in Cuba, so we should have freedom of travel ... We seem to think it's safe to open the door to a billion communists in China but for some reason, we're scared to death of the Cubans."

McGovern blamed "embittered Cuban exiles in Miami" for keeping the embargo alive all these years, because of their dislike for Fidel Castro.

Dr. José Azel frames the embargo in ideological opposition to Karl Marx who "makes it clear in chapter two of The Communist Manifesto that '...the theory of the Communists may be summed up in the single sentence: Abolition of private property.'" Dr. Azel articulates the validity of the embargo and sanctions, on the libertarian principle of property rights that hold the "fundamental reason for the existence of governments is to protect life, liberty, and property."