United States embargo against Cuba
The Cuban Revolution saw to the nationalization of Cuba, high U.S. imports taxes, and forfeiture of U.S.-owned economic assets, including oil refineries, without compensation.
[8] In April 1960, the U.S. Department of State issued a memorandum acknowledging majority support within Cuba for the Castro administration, the fast spread of communism within the country, and the lack of an effective political opposition.
"[10] It recommended a policy that would be "adroit and inconspicuous as possible" while aiming to deny "money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.
[15]: 40 The U.S. viewed the agreement as a provocation, and successfully urged Esso, Texaco, and Shell to refuse to process Soviet crude in their Havana and Santiago de Cuba refineries.
Other countries which had their assets nationalised, including Switzerland, Canada, Spain, and France, were more agreeable to Castro’s terms, seemingly convinced that they would not be able to get a better deal.
The key sponsor of the Cuban Democracy Act, Democrat Robert Torricelli, stated that the legislation would "wreck havoc on that island.
[38] After the Cuban military shot down two airplanes operated by Hermanos al Rescate (Brothers to the Rescue) in 1996, killing three Americans and a U.S. resident, a bi-partisan coalition in the U.S. Congress approved the Helms–Burton Act.
[40] In response to pressure from some American farmers and agribusiness, the embargo was relaxed by the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act, which was passed by Congress in October 2000 and signed by President Bill Clinton.
[91] In 1998, U.S. officials attributed Cuba's economic penury not as a result of the embargo, but instead its unwillingness to liberalize its own economy and substantial debts owed to its Japanese, European, and Latin American trading partners.
[93] Between 1989 and 1992 (the Special Period), the termination of trade partnerships with the Soviet bloc caused the total value of Cuba's exports to fall by 61% and imports to drop by approximately 72%.
[94] International economists believed the Cuban government would fall along with the Soviet Union but Cuba instituted a campaign of macroeconomic adjustment and liberalization instead, which provided significant economic recovery.
U.S. diplomat Lester D. Mallory wrote an internal memo on April 6, 1960, arguing in favor of an embargo to "(make) the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government".
[107][108] Medical scholars have also linked the embargo to epidemics of specific diseases, including neurological disorders and blindness caused by poor nutrition.
[107][109] 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.
[108] In 1997, the American Association for World Health stated that the embargo contributed to malnutrition, poor water access, lack of access to medicine and other medical supplies and concluded that "a humanitarian catastrophe has been averted only because the Cuban government has maintained a high level of budgetary support for a health care system designed to deliver primary and preventative medicine to all its citizens.
"[85][103] The AAWH found that travel restrictions embedded in the embargo have limited the amount of medical information that flows into Cuba from the United States.
Cooperation between the U.S. and Cuba would have been impossible from the very beginning of the Revolution for legal, political, ideological, strategic, and economic reasons, not to mention others of a philosophical or moral character.
Complex licensing and regulatory requirements severely limit export of medicines, medical equipment and supplies, which contain anything produced or patented by the United States, to Cuba.
[119] Federal law requires persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction to obtain a license to engage in any travel-related transactions pursuant to travel to, from, and within Cuba.
[120] The U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) considers any visit of more than one day to be prima facie proof of violation.
[121] OFAC also holds that U.S. citizens may not receive goods or services for free from any Cuban national, eliminating any attempts to circumvent the regulation based on that premise.
[4] 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.
[129] Cato Institute's Daniel Griswold called the embargo a failure, saying the economic sanctions have impoverished Cubans and "deprived Americans of their freedom to travel and has cost US farmers and other producers billions of dollars of potential exports.
[138] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly shared the view that the embargo helps the Castros stay in power by enabling an anti-American narrative.
[139] The Latin America Working Group argues that pro-embargo Cuban-American exiles, whose votes are crucial in the U.S. state of Florida, have swayed many politicians to adopt views similar to their own.
[140] In June 2011, George McGovern, the Democratic nominee for president in 1972, blamed "embittered Cuban exiles in Miami" for keeping the embargo alive.
[144] Film director Michael Moore challenged the embargo by bringing 9/11 rescue workers in need of healthcare to Cuba to obtain subsidized health care.
'[146] Since 1992, the UN General Assembly has passed a non-binding resolution every year, except for 2020, condemning the ongoing impact of the embargo and declaring it in violation of the Charter of the United Nations and of international law.
[150] (The 19th resolution of the 47th session of the UN General Assembly) We strongly support [Cuba's pursuit] of a future with respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.
[152] In January 2012, an Angus Reid Public Opinion poll showed that 57% of Americans called for ending the U.S. travel ban with Cuba, with 27% disagreeing and 16% not sure.
