Should US citizens be allowed to travel to Cuba?

Yes

1 of 23

by Overton G. Ganong

• 

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

Should American Citizens Be Allowed to Travel to Cuba?

Of course, they should. Doesn't the Declaration of Independence declare that the inalienable rights of mankind are "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"? Freedom of movement is the essence of liberty, so as free people, Americans should be able to pursue happiness lounging on the sand at Varadero Beach, sipping a caf con leche on the Malecn, or admiring the mountains of Santiago.

Security concerns dictate that, in time of war, travel to enemy belligerents be prohibited, but the United States and Cuba are not shooting at each other. Restrictions on American travel to Cuba, part of a trade embargo clamped on the island in the early 1960s, are a relic of the Cold War standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union. With the dissolution of the USSR, the Cold War ended, except in one corner of the Caribbean.

The embargo on Cuba is an aberration, and the policy no longer makes sense. Is the policy in place because Cuba is a Communist state? If so, why can U.S. citizens stroll about Tiananmen Square in Beijing and poke about the Cu Chi Tunnels near Ho Chi Minh City in Vietnam? Is the policy in place because Cuba is an adversary in the international political arena? If so, why could Americans, at the height of Cold War tensions, visit St. Basil's Cathedral and Lenin's tomb in Moscow? Is the policy in place because Cuba is an authoritarian state? One must admit that Egypt is also authoritarian, yet thousands of Americans travel there for business and pleasure each year. Americans can marvel at the pyramids of Giza but are forbidden to explore the great colonial fortress of El Morro, a mere 90 miles from Key West, Florida.

Why does this prohibition exist? It cannot be because the U.S. government fears that its citizens will be so impressed by the achievements of the Cuban Revolution that they will convert to Communism. Economically, the revolution has been a disaster. Once among the richest countries in Latin America, Cuba is now one of the poorest. The revolution's failures result from a rigid ideology that stifles enterprise and innovation, a long dependence on subsidies from the Soviet Union, and sheer bureaucratic incompetence. Present-day Cuba has become, in effect, a museum of Communism's failures. Only a committed ideologue would find it inspiring. The reason for the travel restriction must lie elsewhere.

The reason can be found in the anger, frustration, and stubbornness of the Cuban exile community in Florida, coupled with the peculiar nature of American presidential politics. Cubans who fled the island after the revolution and settled in large numbers in South Florida have never accepted the legitimacy of Fidel Castro's regime, even though, prior to his recent retirement, he was the longest serving head of state in the world. Their recalcitrance is not necessarily shared by later arrivals, who grew up under the revolution but left the island seeking greater freedom and opportunity. Nevertheless, the elite of the Cuban-American community its business, professional, and social leaders by and large still belong to the first generation of exiles who came, many as children, in the early 1960s. As a group they harbor powerful grievances against the revolution, and through influence and intimidation, they generally have been successful in squelching voices of dissent within their community.

In the context of the 1960s, economic sanctions against the Castro regime made sense. The exiles wanted to strike back at Fidel, while the U.S. government wanted to punish Cuba for nationalizing American businesses and property. After the failed exile invasion at the Bay of Pigs in 1961, the establishment of Soviet bases on the island, and the harrowing missile crisis of 1962, the U.S. sought to isolate the Cuban regime and punish it economically. Part of this strategy was to keep American tourists, and their dollars, out of Cuba, which before the revolution had been a popular playground. Cutting off travel and trade seemed a reasonable weapon against an antagonistic regime, once military force was no longer feasible.

Forty years later, conditions that once supported travel restrictions and the larger trade embargo have disappeared. The Soviet Union is no more. Cuba no longer pursues revolutionary adventures in Latin America and Africa, and poses no conceivable military threat to the U.S.
Nevertheless, the socialist system Fidel Castro established still stands. The embargo has failed to effect any meaningful change.

Paradoxically , the embargo's greatest "success" has been to prop up Fidel's regime. It gave him an excuse for Cuba's economic failures and furnished a credible grievance around which to rally support. By keeping big-spending and free-talking Americans off the island, it insulated Cuba from U.S. influence. Meanwhile, Canadian and European tourists have flocked to the beaches and nightclubs of Havana, and investors from those countries continue to build new resorts and hotels to accommodate them.

Despite being ineffective and counterproductive, travel restrictions have been tightened, even though polls show U.S. citizens increasingly want them to end. They persist because of two factors: the concentration of the Cuban-American population in South Florida and the electoral college in presidential politics. The electoral college gives inordinate weight to a small number of "swing" states where both parties are competitive. Florida is a swing state, and its 27 electoral votes are a major prize in any presidential contest. The state's Cuban-American community, 833,000 strong, more than 600,000 of them concentrated in Dade County, is a powerful voting bloc, eight percent of the state's total electorate. As long as a significant majority supports the embargo and its restrictions on travel, American political parties and their presidential candidates will be reluctant to oppose that policy.

There is evidence that opinion in the Cuban American community is becoming more moderate on the question of relations with Cuba. This trend may gain strength now that Fidel Castro is no longer head of state. If so, it should give American politicians more confidence in abolishing a bankrupt and nonsensical policy. The prohibition on travel to Cuba, and the larger embargo of which it is a part, are relics of the past and should be given a proper burial.

Learn more about this author, Overton G. Ganong.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.