News Release

November 2, 2000

Lifting Cuba embargo would serve U.S. interests, study says
Sanctions deprive United States of positive influence in reforming island

WASHINGTON-The decision by Congress last month to allow food and medicine exports to Cuba signals a weakening of political support for the sanctions the United States has imposed on the island nation for 38 years. But a new study from the Cato Institute says U.S. interests would be better served if Washington further lifted the trade embargo.

In "A Policy toward Cuba That Serves U.S. Interests," Philip Peters, vice president of the Lexington Institute and former State Department official in the Reagan and Bush administrations, argues that Cuba's collapse as a U.S. security threat compels Washington to reconsider the embargo. "U.S. policies designed to bring Fidel Castro down have backfired," he writes. "Those policies place him in the world political limelight, renew his claim to victimhood, reinforce many of his favorite nationalist arguments, and miss opportunities to influence Cuba's future by blocking free interaction with American society."

Although socialism persists in Cuba, limited change is taking place, Peters notes. Some private enterprise has been allowed, and many Cubans are learning firsthand the advantages of a capitalist system. But while trade, travel and investment from other countries are improving Cubans' living standards and exposing them to capitalism, "an end to the U.S. embargo would have the same effects but on a greater scale because of our nation's size and proximity," Peters writes.

Cuba's restrictive labor and business laws should not deter the United States, Peters says. Because the informal market and the extra compensations paid by some businesses are rarely acknowledged, "the law only partially explains what is occurring in the Cuban economy," he writes. "American engagement would expand Cuba's incipient private sector and add to its growth."

In addition, sanctions violate the rights of the American people to trade and travel-"rights that Americans enjoy in parts of the world that are not considered national security threats and that hardly have enviable human rights," Peters points out. He recommends abolishing the entire system of federal licensing of travel to Cuba.

Peters concludes that "a new policy that relies less on isolation and more on the magnetism of American society would play to America's strength, and it would serve both nations' interests by building bridges to Cuba's next generation."

"A Policy toward Cuba That Serves U.S. Interests"