by Luke Loranger |
On March 20, Obama became the first U.S. President to visit Cuba in 88 years. This historic visit follows the easing of tensions between the two countries that began when they reinstated diplomatic ties at the end of 2014 with prodding from Pope Francis. The Beacon spoke with history professor and Cuba expert Blair Woodard to get a better understanding of the situation.
Where do you see Cuba moving to long-term in regards to politics?
That’s a good question because they are not making any statements that will fundamentally change their system. Right now, Raul Castro is president, and they have already picked out their next president, essentially, as well (Miguel Díaz-Canel). He is considered to have hardline (political views) and he is the current vice president of the country. Raul Castro has said he will step down at the end of his term in 2018. They are not saying they will change anything...(The question is), will they move toward a representative democracy?
As far as everything else, they are desperately trying to maintain the tenants of the revolution, (which include) housing and education for everybody. They want to maintain this equal system, but that is being challenged by the economic realities that are happening on the ground. You have the convertible or “CUC” economy, and you have the Cuban peso, which is worth a lot less (30/1). Government employees and professionals who have used the education system, such as lawyers, and doctors, their brains belong to the Cuban state. They get paid in national currency. Anyone in the tourism industry, such as independent contractors, taxi drivers or people renting rooms earn money in “CUC”. Doctors earn roughly 40 CUP (Cuban Peso) a month, and taxi drivers earn that in a day. That is a problem, and nobody has a solution for it, but it has to happen for it to be OK.
If that didn’t happen, what would be the outcome?
It is bad to have two currencies running at the same moment. You have the service industry profiting far more than the professional industry. That is wrong because it does not encourage people to go into (professional sectors). Why would you go to medical school if all you had to do was get a driver’s license and make more money?
Do you think, in the short term, Obama’s visit has changed anything?
Obama has already changed things. The main thing with Obama is December 17, 2014. The Cubans refer to this as D-17. D-17 is when the Cubans and U.S. announced they had already gone through negotiations brokered by Pope Francis in Canada the year before. On December 17, they announced jointly that they would renew diplomatic relations. Diplomatic relations were broken by Eisenhower in January 1961. We have reopened embassies, which were in Cuba the whole time. However, it does not have an ambassador yet, so it will be interesting to see when that happens, because it will have to be confirmed by Congress.
The U.S. is also easing travel restrictions in a massive way. Any person in the U.S. can travel to Cuba for educational reasons, but it does not have to be on an organized tour. Therefore, anyone can go to Cuba, because you are saying you are going to get educated. They are also allowing U.S. companies to negotiate contracts, such as airlines and Marriott. However, this still flies in the face of the law right now, which is the embargo, which is still in effect. Obama cannot lift that by decree because, in 1994, Congress sought to prevent that by instituting the Helms Burton Act, which makes it so that lifting the embargo must be by Congress. If a Republican is elected, the question is whether that president would roll back everything that has taken place. However, I think that would be vastly unpopular because the majority of the U.S. population now views the embargo as totally outdated and effective. People want to travel there.
How do you think the removal of the embargo would shape the Cuban economy?
It would be huge. Right now, you have the largest, industrialized, wealthiest nation in the world sitting 90 miles from their shores. We are not allowed to trade with them in any real way, so they get goods from other countries. They do massive amounts of trade with Mexico, Canada and other Latin American countries. They are still having to import stuff for more money than if it came from the U.S., which means things cost more for the Cubans to bring in. The main products are agricultural products, because even though Cuba is bigger than countries like Jamaica, it is not food independent. It’s on its way to doing that nowadays, but before it had still pretty much been mono-cropped as a sugar economy. The fact that we would be able to send them our agricultural goods is big.
The fact that the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture was with Obama in Havana is no accident. A lot of pressure to remove the embargo will come from the big agricultural states in the Midwest, but the ultimate way the embargo will get removed is when you have Floridians say they are OK with this happening. Much of the pressure to keep the embargo comes from the exile community in South Florida.
Do you think they would be OK with this happening?
It is changing. You have generations of people who have moved from Cuba, but the younger generation does not feel the same ideological and economic disdain toward Castro that their parents and grandparents did. They were forced to leave in many ways. Some chose to leave, but the first people to come over did not do well economically in Cuba, or were not able to function intellectually. Up until 1980, when the Mariel Boatlift happened, the Cubans could be considered ideological immigrants. (After the Mariel Boatlift) it was more of an economic immigration, but it was still during the Cold War so it is couched as ideological. After the Cold War, it can be seen as more economic, just like anyone else moving to the U.S.
The later generations do not have the same experience, and do not feel the same hatred towards the Castro regime. Recent polls see the younger generations as more willing to accept a more open relationship, because they see it as an economic opportunity for themselves.
Do you see the embargo being lifted in the next six years?
Maybe. You would hope. Historically speaking, the embargo has been in place for 55 years, and it has failed. It is time to try something new, so why not trade with them? The reason is often given that they do not have a democratic society, and are committing human rights abuses. The reality is the U.S. deals economically with far harsher regimes that commit far harsher atrocities than Cubans ever do.
What would be the benefits the U.S. would receive from lifting the embargo, outside economic reasons?
Nobody else in the world supports the embargo. Only Israel and Palau support it when votes are taken in the U.N. Our closest allies and our enemies are willing to trade with Cuba, and we are the only one that doesn’t. It makes the U.S. look antiquated and like sour grapes on this one country. It goes back historically to how we felt about Cuba. We had this policy of no transfer and did not want the Spanish to give the island to anyone else when the empire collapsed. However, we really did not want the Cubans themselves to run their own island. We have to get over that as a nation, and (let them be) sovereign. It gives us a nation of 12 million (people) to sell to. There are huge connections between the U.S. and Cuba in regards to film, culture and baseball that would benefit from cultural exchange. Tourism wise, the U.S. will benefit from being able to visit Cuba.
Luke Loranger is a reporter for The Beacon, he can be reached at loranger18@up.edu.
