Image from Cox and Forkum Political Cartoons

Fidel Castro is out and little brother Castro is in. What does that mean for the relationship between the United States and Cuba? Nothing, everything, the possibility for a new place to get a time share?

Some would say that the relationship with Cuba and the US has been a little tense over the last 50 years. But with Fidel out many politicians are looking for an opportunity to spark a new and improved relationship between the two. However much of this relationship depends on Cuba’s willingness to right their wrongs and to release political prisoners.

In case you didn’t know these are the current restrictions on American Citizens set by the United States Government regarding Cuba. No goods/services other than humanitarian aid can be imported to or exported from Cuba to or from the US. Travel to Cuba is legal for US citizens as long as you acquire the proper license, however it is illegal for any citizen to spend money on Cuban products.

The issue seems to be about lifting the embargo on Cuban goods, or at least that is what the candidates are focusing on. After the jump you will see my thoughts on what the real issue should be.

According to CNN on the issue of Cuba:

John McCain
Would keep the embargo in place and not allow economic aid to flow to Cuba. Would “press the Cuban regime to release all political prisoners unconditionally, to legalize all political parties, labor unions and free media and to schedule internationally monitored elections.” Only when those conditions are met would he consider lifter the embargo. Would have the Justice Department prosecute Cuban officials implicated in the murder of Americans, drug trafficking and other crimes. Would increase support to Radio and TV Marti and “other means to communicate directly with the Cuban people.”

Barack Obama
Would not lift the embargo unless Cuba releases political prisoners, starts instituting free press and takes other steps to democratize the island, but is looking to normalize relations at some point. Would meet the Cuban leadership without preconditions but with preparation. Would “immediately allow unlimited family travel and remittances to the island.”

Both candidates want to keep the embargo on Cuban goods until Cuba makes some serious changes, and Barack would “immediately allow unlimited family travel”. But shouldn’t we have that right anyway? Why does the government have the ability to block our right to travel where we want when we want? We live in a capitalistic society and yet our government is telling us what we can buy, sell, and trade with who. Shouldn’t we be less concerned with punishing Cuba for mistakes they have made / we have made and be more concerned about our government placing embargoes on American citizens, and privately owned companies. I really don’t know a lot about this subject but it seems to me that the issue shouldn’t be how and why we remove the embargo on Cuba, but why it was allowed in the first place.

Please explain this to me. Am I completely off course, or does it makes sense that the issue shouldn’t be about when to lift the embargo, but why the government was allowed to stop US citizens from free trade/travel.

Tags: 2008 Election Issues
Posted in Politics |