oil spill florida cuba

The federal government recently announced it was creating a new task force law enforcement to be responsible for taking action against violators of U.S. trade sanctions and travel to the island of Cuba. Within the working group staff departments of Commerce, Treasury and Homeland Security and FBI agents, will focus on people and companies involved in trade, travel and money transfer in Cuba.

The sanctions, which were in force for over forty years, and will remain in place until free and fair elections take place, is supposed to isolate the Castro dictatorship politically, economically and socially. The However reality is that only serve to harm the Cuban people, while the Castro brothers maintain their grip on power.

Historically, sanctions economics has done little to change the behavior of bad governments and ruthless dictators. Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times wrote in 2003 that "The United States imposed 85 new unilateral economic sanctions against foreign nations from 1996 to 2001. But sanctions, which cost U.S. companies up to $ 19 million in 1995 alone, not a policy, which are a substitute for welfare. "

In most of the issues facing America today, I find myself in the end opposite political spectrum from Mr. Kristof. However, the issue of economic sanctions provides a rare opportunity for us to agree on an issue policy. There were very few cases where economic sanctions remained of power. Almost always fail to achieve the policy objectives of the nation imposing them and usually end up hurting the people who are supposed to help.

For economic sanctions to work against a particular state, there must be a global consensus for application. Sanctions imposed and enforced by one nation alone rarely have the desired effect, because the nation will be punished with other trading partners, just to pursue an economic activity. Too often, business opportunities and investment programs prevent countries from signing a diet sanctions, although they may find misconduct in the destination country.

Take for example the recent debates at the Security Council of United Nations enrichment activities of uranium by Iran. Despite a clear threat to peace and stability if Iran acquired nuclear weapons, Russia, France and China have refused to approve the sanctions that limit Iran's access to nuclear technology. The three nations have commercial interests in Iran and the three to lose money if sanctions are imposed. Even if the United States has imposed unilateral sanctions to complement the existing restrictions, the effect on the radical Iranian regime would be negligible best.

In the case Cuba, the existing sanctions against the Castro regime are largely American, and as such are considered summarily by most other nations. Although Castro has certainly been deprived of U.S. dollars, there was no shortage of willing trading partners or suppliers of arms to the communist dictatorship. Cuba has suffered economic difficulties since the collapse of the Soviet Union, but financial difficulties are the result of losing a sponsor of the island nation for a long time and economic policy and not the result of U.S. sanctions economic.

Indeed, U.S. sanctions against Cuba hurt American businesses, Cuban-Americans with parents living under the Castro dictatorship, and Cuban citizens. Fidel and Raul Castro have used economic sanctions as a scapegoat for U.S. the island state economic depression without consequences.

The United States should actively promote democratic values and the promise of a better life without Castro, in particular through the large population of Cubans in South Florida. The end of communist rule in Cuba is a matter of "when" and not "if." Finally, the regime will fall, like the former Soviet Union. Meanwhile, other methods for promoting regime change should be explored and pursued, and economic sanctions that have done more to hurt the Cuban people, Castro's government in four decades should be lifted.

Landrieu: Rigs could go to Cuba — closer to Florida coast (Part I)