The Cuban Embargo
The process began in the summer of 1960 when the Cuban government ordered two U.S. oil companies, Standard and Texaco, to refine Soviet crude oil at their Cuban refineries, rather than the oil they had been bringing in from their own sources. Not surprisingly, they refused. The Cuban response, on July 1st, was to nationalize both companies' holdings in Cuba. A few days later, the United States retaliated by cutting the Cuban sugar quota, and that led, in August, to Cuba's nationalization of virtually all U.S. property on the island. Since the embargo was issued, almost 40 years ago, it has only brought bigger and bigger problems. Neither country benefits from the effects of the economic embargo; therefore, the United States should lift the embargo on Cuba.The Cuban Embargo is harming the poor people of Cuba. Although the embargo is not the main reason for the Cuban people's misery, Cuba's economy has something to do with it as well. The economy under Castro's rule and policies is poor. If the embargo has no impact, then all it does it make things worse on the Cuban people. One of the policies of the United States toward Cuba is embodied in the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act, signed into law
All of the attention focused on the embargo should be going to anti-terrorism. Not only has the embargo backfired, it wastes American resources that are needed to fight terrorism. Cuba is not filled with terrorists and no longer possesses any threat upon the United States. Aaron Lukas, an analyst at the Cato Institute's Center for Trade Policy Studies, says, "Even the despicable government headed by Fidel Castro doesn't seriously threaten us." Along with an end to the embargo, funds currently wasted on attempts to de-legitimize the Castro regime could be diverted to more productive uses. For instance, money currently spent on Radio Mardi (which is electronically jammed by the Cuban government) could go instead to a Radio Free Afghanistan-a region where the broadcasts might actually do some good. in March 1996. Popularly known as the Helms-Burton or Libertad Act, this legislation not only targets Cuba but also punishes U.S. allies who trade with and invest in Cuba. The bill enforces the economic embargo against Cuba and seeks, in Title III, to punish foreign-owned companies that engage in the "wrongful trafficking in property confiscated by the Castro regime." By lifting the embargo, the United States would be rewarding Castro for his awful acts against human rights. Cuba regularly ranks with the likes of Iraq, Syria, Libya and North Korea with regard to its human rights records. Castro's security forces crush even the most basic rights that we as Americans enjoy. Freedoms that we don't give a second thought to (freedom of expression, association, assembly and movement) are completely alien to most Cuban people. Castro's operatives on a local level, called the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution, monitor and suppress independent thought among each and every Cuban civilian in their own neighborhood. It is never justified for a government to limit religious freedom or to limit freedom of expression. In Cuba, these limitations are justified precisely because of the alleged threat posed by the U.S. President Bush has called the sanctions "a moral statement" and insists that U.S.-Cuba relations will not improve until Cuba embraces democracy and human rights.
Some common words found in the essay are:
Cuban Embargo, South Florida, Chile Indonesia, Helms-Burton Act, United Cuba, Paula Stern, Fidel Castro, President Bush, North Korea, Standard Texaco, cuban government, embargo cuba, united cuba, cuban people, human rights, castro regime, economic embargo, cuban embargo, poor people cuba, freedom expression, soybean wheat, campaign unilateral sanctions, rice corn soybean, corn soybean wheat, soybean wheat poultry,
Approximate Word count = 1628
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
