Posted on 05/21/2002 3:39:27 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
MIAMI -- Playing to a constituency that was crucial to his White House win and may be key to his brother's re-election, President Bush vowed Monday to block efforts to ease restrictions on Cuba until its longtime leader Fidel Castro institutes major economic and political changes.
Bush, in an address marking the 100th anniversary of Cuba's independence from Spain, labeled Castro a "tyrant" and criticized him for suppressing democracy and torturing and jailing political dissidents.
"Mr. Castro, once, just once show that you're unafraid of a real election," Bush said to thousands of Cuban-Americans at the James L. Knight Center in downtown Miami. He drew rousing cheers and chants of "Cuba Si! Castro No!" from the crowd. Cuba is expected to hold elections for its National Assembly in 2003.
The president added that "full normalization of relations with Cuba, diplomatic recognition, open trade, and a robust aid program will only be possible when Cuba has a new government that is fully democratic, when the rule of law is respected and when human rights of all Cubans are protected."
The president offered a handful of minor concessions to critics of his hard-line stance, agreeing to negotiate an end to the ban on U.S. mail service to Cuba and loosening restrictions on humanitarian aid to the island nation from religious and other nongovernmental groups.
Although a bipartisan group of lawmakers is agitating to do away with the 40-year-old trade embargo and lift travel restrictions, Bush threatened to veto some measures that would liberalize relations with Cuba.
Aside from holding free elections, Bush said Cuba must give opposition candidates the freedom to organize and use the airwaves, release political prisoners and allow them to vote, let human rights organizations into the country to monitor the elections and allow creation of nongovernmental unions.
"In an era when every other nation in our hemisphere has chosen the path to democracy ... this leader instead chooses to jail, to torture and exile Cuban people for speaking their minds," Bush said.
Bush's speech was in contrast to the more conciliatory approach taken by former President Carter, who during his visit to Cuba last week encouraged the easing of U.S. sanctions even as he chastised Castro for his human rights record.
But Bush never mentioned Carter's outreach in a speech that was intended to reassure a vocal element of the Republican base in this politically important state.
At the rally, Bush was introduced by his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who is depending on the strong support of Cuban-Americans in his re-election campaign this November.
After the rally the president attended a $25,000 a couple fund-raiser sponsored by the state Republican Party that will primarily benefit Jeb Bush's campaign.
The event, which was expected to raise $2 million, was held at the home of Armando Codina, a former business partner of the governor. A number of Democrats are vying to face Jeb Bush, the most prominent being Janet Reno, President Clinton's attorney general.
President Bush also is indebted to Cuban-Americans for their support in his narrow victory in Florida that enabled him to claim the White House. About 82 percent of the state's estimated 400,000 Cuban-American voters went for Bush over Democrat Al Gore in the 2000 race.
And since his election Bush has rewarded this constituency by appointing Cuban-Americans to influential posts. He picked Mel Martinez as secretary of Housing and Urban Development and Otto Reich, an anti-Castro hard-liner, as assistant secretary of state for Western Hemispheric Affairs.
While the most outspoken Cuban-American leaders, particularly the older generation, still have a visceral hatred of Castro and support the continuation of sanctions, younger members of the community are more willing to accept some relaxation of restrictions, surveys have found.
A recent poll of 800 Cuban-American exiles in Miami by Bendixen and Associates found that the community was split on lifting restrictions on Americans traveling to Cuba.
Bush may have had this younger generation in mind when he announced that he was willing to consider lifting the ban on mail service to Cuba, which has been in effect since 1962.
The president also said he would offer scholarships in the United States to Cuban students, including the children of political prisoners in Cuba. He added his administration would look for ways to modernize Radio and TV Marti, which broadcast from the United States into Cuba.
"These are beginning steps," he said. "We'll listen to the leaders in the community for innovative ways to continue the inevitable march, and to hasten the inevitable march toward freedom."
Bush also faces increasing opposition to his Cuba policy from a coalition of Democrats and farm state Republicans in Congress who want to open the struggling country to American exports.
These lawmakers hold that the embargo and other restrictions are outdated relics of the Cold War that hurt United States business and poor Cubans. They also argue that it does not make sense for the United States to have established normal trading relations with countries such as China, which is ruled by a communist regime and has an abysmal record on human rights, while refusing to deal with Castro.
Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., who chairs the Western Hemisphere subcommittee, said there needs to be "a fundamental change in the way we look at Cuba." He added that "U.S.-Cuban relations are held hostage to a small minority in each country."
While both the House and Senate have approved the easing of travel restrictions to Cuba in recent years, House GOP leaders have managed to kill such measures before they ever reached the president's desk.
Bush sought to knock down the argument that restoring relations with Cuba would improve the lives of the average workers there, arguing that Castro would skim profits from increased trade.
"I want you to understand that I know what trade means with a tyrant. It means that we will underwrite tyranny, and we will not let that happen," he said.
The president also said he opposed legislation being considered by Congress that would provide incentives to Castro to buy American products.
"And I also want you to know I will not allow our taxpayers' money to go to enrich the Castro regime," he said. "And I'm willing to use my veto."
***The final component of the initiative isn't new at all. The U.S. government put an open offer on the table in 1999 to resume regular mail service, but Cuba has thus far declined. Although there is limited written communication with the people on the island through private couriers based in the Caribbean, direct-mail service would greatly increase contact with the Cuban people.***- Source
Remarks by the President on Cuba Policy Review - The East Room (audio and visual links too)
Complete text of Carter's televised speech to the Cuban people
__________________________________________________________________________________________
Bush also faces increasing opposition to his Cuba policy from a coalition of Democrats and farm state Republicans in Congress who want to open the struggling country to American exports.
Fomenting Freedom - Circumventing Castro to reach the Cuban people***Engaging Cuba, in fact, has the unavoidable consequence of propping up the Communist dictatorship. European money that flooded in starting in the early 1990's after the fall of the Soviet Union was vital to the survival of the regime, and it gave Castro a financial shot in the arm.
European cash almost solely lines Castro's pockets because of the way the dictator has fashioned the terms of engagement. Foreign companies must establish joint ventures with the Cuban government, with a cut of the profits going to Castro. But the despot nets more cash from the labor arrangement: Workers are not employed by foreign companies; they are rented.
Companies pay Castro's machine approximately $1,000 per month per worker, in hard cash. The regime, in turn, shells out less than $20 - per month - to each worker, in pesos. In other words, 98 percent of all wages paid by foreign companies in Cuba are funneled straight to Castro.
Because Castro has been denied American cash from such joint ventures and for several other reasons, the embargo has worked, even if it hasn't dethroned him. The embargo has put Castro in a box, and has robbed him of resources to fund his extracurricular activities. As a senior administration official noted, "If Castro has to spend $40 million on food, that's $40 million he's not spending to develop biological weapons."
Despite the morally despicable conditions for joint ventures, a large number of Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill are pressing for engagement with Castro. In fairness, many simply don't understand that the communist dictatorship relies on foreign cash for its very existence, but ignorance should not be an excuse for ignorant policy.
Bush's speech may pave the way for expunging Congress's blissful ignorance, and likely will be cheered on Capitol Hill in the long run.***
WHY ??
It's simple. Americans are either arrogant, or naive (or both), to believe that we are the only country on the face of the earth that can trade effectively with Cuba. Cuba can export any product it wishes to any other nation on the face of the earth except the U.S., and that is exactly what it does.
Cuba sells abroad all the cigars, sugar and rum it can produce. It doesn't have much else.
On the other hand, Cuba can buy all the consumer and industrial goods in can afford from Europe, Asia, Canada and Brazil. Because Cuba doesn't sell much abroad, it can't buy much abroad. It's called balance of trade. In reality, it doesn't much matter whether the U.S. is part of the equation or not.
What Dodd, Carter et al mean by "trade with Cuba" is for U.S. companies like Sara Lee, Levi Strauss and others to exploit cheap human labor in that poor impoverished country, just like they do in the rest of Latin America.
Cubans don't have the money to buy John Deere tractors irrespective of the embargo. But, if John Deere opened a manufacturing plant there, they could pay Cubans a whopping dollar an hour. That would enbable John Deere to sell its tractors more competitvely around the world, and bring dollars home to America.
I wonder if the Democrat-oriented labor unions know what their champions Like Dodd, and others are really attempting to do by "opening trade" with Cuba ??
Cubans don't have the money to buy John Deere tractors irrespective of the embargo. But, if John Deere opened a manufacturing plant there, they could pay Cubans a whopping dollar an hour. That would enbable John Deere to sell its tractors more competitvely around the world, and bring dollars home to America.
***European cash almost solely lines Castro's pockets because of the way the dictator has fashioned the terms of engagement. Foreign companies must establish joint ventures with the Cuban government, with a cut of the profits going to Castro. But the despot nets more cash from the labor arrangement: Workers are not employed by foreign companies; they are rented. Companies pay Castro's machine approximately $1,000 per month per worker, in hard cash. The regime, in turn, shells out less than $20 - per month - to each worker, in pesos. In other words, 98 percent of all wages paid by foreign companies in Cuba are funneled straight to Castro.*** (Source in Post #1)
Then, WE can pay the worker $20/month directly.
Cuba is ripe for exploitation and investment, but NOT for "trade" in the traditional sense of the word.
Like Alice in Wonderland, what Dodd says and what Dodd means are two different things.
There are many Americans, political leaders and ordinary citizens alike, whose primary concern for Cuba is to see a democracy established there -- so the people there may pursue life, liberty and happiness just as we do.
Despite his rhetoric, I do not believe those goals are what Senator Dodd hopes to achieve ultimately -- it's just not the way a socialist Democrat thinks, ideologically there's not much that separates Dodd and Castro.
OK -- so instead of "exploiting" a Cuban worker by paying them $20/month, we'll pay 'em $500/month. Still, a whole lot less than the mythical John Deere union-worker makes in Moline. Then our consciences are eased and the Cubans themselves feel "saved," and flush with cash. And, instead of Castro, U.S. companies will become the "middlemen" who broker cheap Cuban labor and manufacturing capabilities.
This is the same scenario we see in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Mexico and others. Why would Cuba be any different ??
And, politically, it'll be much more palatable for Wal-Mart to do business with a "democratic" Cuba than sending all those U.S. dollars to Chinese communists.
I'll tell you what, we can solve Dodd's argument with a compromise. Let's end the trade embargo. Americans can buy anything Cuba has to offer and sell Cubans anything they have the dollars to exchange. But, U.S. law will continue to prohibit direct American investment in the Cuban economy.
Do you think Dodd and his side of the aisle would agree with that approach ?? If humanitarian trade is his real objective -- then he ought to support trade -- but, direct investment is a different issue.
Maybe, we should go ahead and "trade" with Cuba today -- when they install a democratically elected government, then we'll consider allowing direct investment in the Cuban infrastructure??
What do you think about that ??
If we really "care" about Cuba's economic future and prosperity, give 'em the opportunity to home-grow their own capitalists !!
Who's the "we?" Businesses would be hiring. Do you think the only reason Bush wants to open Cuba up is to exploit a work force? Dodd just wants to keep Castro in power and a thorn in the side of a free market economy. The best way to do that is to use U.S. taxpayers' money to purchase goods from districts with farm interests. The side benefit is shoring up the Democrat vote.
Why should the consciences of business be an issue? If the workers begin to move up the economic ladder and are free to choose their employer, vote for their government, read freely and travel freely, who are you to find that offensive? In time they will be starting businesses and hiring and all that comes with capitalism and a free market ecomony.
This is the same scenario we see in Nicaragua, El Salvador, Mexico and others. Why would Cuba be any different ??
These countries are still struggling with corruption and need to get out of the mind-set of pay-offs and bribes being part of the cost of doing business. It will be the same in Cuba, as it has been in Russia. After having to deal in an underground economy and stealing goods from the all powerful government in order to barter and make ends meet, it takes time to adjust.
And, politically, it'll be much more palatable for Wal-Mart to do business with a "democratic" Cuba than sending all those U.S. dollars to Chinese communists.
Hey, competition never hurts!!
I'll tell you what, we can solve Dodd's argument with a compromise. Let's end the trade embargo. Americans can buy anything Cuba has to offer and sell Cubans anything they have the dollars to exchange. But, U.S. law will continue to prohibit direct American investment in the Cuban economy.
Interesting proposal but it leaves Castro in place as the go-between. Besides, at the present time Castro can buy from the U.S. - the part that sticks in his commie throat is that it be cash on the barrel head. Of course some items are off limits but that's what he should expect being a terrorist. Now this part, about investing in the Cuban economy, leaves me with the response that the CEO is Castro and we should not trade with someone who stated goal is to bring us to our knees. That includes investing or buying to help finance our own destruction.
Do you think Dodd and his side of the aisle would agree with that approach ?? If humanitarian trade is his real objective -- then he ought to support trade -- but, direct investment is a different issue.
I've already given my view of Christopher "I never met a commie I couldn't love" Dodd. His side of the aisle, and some on the other side, are socialists or politicians in farm districts who want to do their constituents' bidding. Personally, I don't want to keep Castro afloat or be billed for subsidized government loans to free up Castro's capital and enable him more freedom to support terrorism.
Maybe, we should go ahead and "trade" with Cuba today -- when they install a democratically elected government, then we'll consider allowing direct investment in the Cuban infrastructure??
If we grant subsidized loans to Castro he will not allow elections, or free speech, etc. he will continue as he has, which includes exporting his miserable ideology. Look at Venezuela and his protégé, Hugo Chavez. There's oil in that country and Castro has a willing pupil.
What do you think about that ?? If we really "care" about Cuba's economic future and prosperity, give 'em the opportunity to home-grow their own capitalists !!
The only way they will be free to become capitalists is when they are free. When the Soviet Union's ecomony collapsed, Castro's regime became a dead man walking. He's been transfused by Canadian, Italian and German tourism money but he's hurting and needs us to bail him out. Why would we be so insane as to do that?
I believe in democracy, I would like to see democratic institutions implemented in Cuba, I despise Castro, I want to see him deposed, I want the Cubans to have the freedom to seek whatever self-determination they choose, collectively as a nation, but more importantly as individuals, I am a capitalist, I believe in free enterprise, I believe economic success in Cuba would benefit the entire hemisphere, I support a COMPLETE economic/trade embargo of Cuba so long as Castro stays in power, I support every word Dubya said in his Miami speech, I think Carter and Dodd are completely wrong.
I am thoroughly confused at some of your responses -- for example, who in the world said anything about loaning money to Castro, or his regime ?? What has "loaning" money got to do with trade with Cuba, now or in the future ??
TRADE means we exchange goods or services for money. It IS NOT "trade" if we loan them money, and then they use it to "buy" something from us. That's not trade -- that's charity and that's not what I'm talking about at all. And, that's not what I mean by investment.
And, I'm not talking about competition with China -- we should not be sustaining that evil, communistic empire with our dollars, period.
My point was, in the future, Americans would rather trade with a new democracy in Cuba, just 90 miles off our shores, than to send dollars to China where children and prisoners toil in sweat shops supporting a state that intends ultimately to destroy us.
You have so thoroughly misunderstood my position that I am at a loss how to proceed except to return to my original argument.
Today, if Cuba wants to buy a new John Deere tractor, they send us $30,000 (cash on the barrelhead, as you say) and we ship them back a tractor. That is an example of trade. That is not what Dodd wants. He wants Sara Lee to go down there, build a Hanes underware facility and let Cuban workers sew tee-shirts and briefs for a $1 an hour, ship 'em back to the U.S. and we'll consume them for $9.95 a 3-pack. That's Dodd's idea of trade.
What are YOU talking about ??
I say no trade paid for by guaranteed govt. loans. No, zip, zero, nada exchanges in any way shape or form that will bring money into Castro's pocket. So until there is no Castro and no communism, there is no way to approach this.
Regarding China. I am debating Cuba. China is another whole can of worms and quite frankly I get tired of people saying well, if we deal with China, why not Cuba? I reply, so we should punish the Cuban people by legitimizing Castro because China is a communist country too? That makes no sense and to me and if it makes sense to them, I wonder what their real argument and agenda is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.