Back in 1972, then-president Richard Nixon went to China. His trip set the groundwork for normalization of relations with China, a country that since has devoured the US economically and sends us shoddy and dangerous goods.
But at least it is not a belligerent a la North Korea or Iran, and indeed now tries to keep North Korea in check.
On June 12, 1987, then president Ronald Reagan challenged then USSR premier Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall. The wall eventually came down on November 9, 1989.
In 1995, then-president Wm. Clinton normalized relations with Vietnam, a country with which the US had been at war for a number of years during which 58, 209 Americans lost their lives (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war)
We’ve established a relative peace with most of our former foes, certainly the ones that had – some still have – the capability of harming US citizens at home and around the globe.
In February, 1962, then-president John Kennedy, with an executive order, placed an embargo on Fidel Castro’s Cuba. Kennedy imposed travel restrictions on February 8, 1963, and the Cuban Assets Control Regulations were issued on July 8, 1963. (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_embargo_against_Cuba#Kennedy-era_embargo)
For an interesting aside, see the Wikipedia entry (ibid.) regarding Kennedy’s fondness for, and pre-embargo purchase of, Cuban cigars.
The US State Department considers, in 2013, that Cuba is a “state sponsor of terrorism” and based on that, prevents almost all travel by US citizens to Cuba.
Cuba, which made the list in 1982, is one of only four countries the US State considers to be a “state sponsor of terrorism,” the others being Syria (1979), Iran (1984), and Sudan (1993). Libya was on the list but it was removed. China, North Korea, and Saudia are absent from the list, although they are actively warring against the US either financially and industrially (China), providing funding and shelter for Muslim terrorists (Saudia and other Muslim-dominated countries), or blatantly threatening the US with missiles (North Korea).
The only threat to the US Cuba might possess is cancer caused by smoking Cuban cigars and cigarettes.
There seems NO valid reason to prevent average US citizens from visiting the island. Special permits have been granted to some American citizens and they have come back safely. That cannot be said for other countries, Mexico in particular, yet there is no prohibition on travel to Mexico.
So why is the embargo still in place?
Primarily because expatriate Cubans, despite claims to the contrary, don’t want to go home. They have “Cubanized” South Florida which explains why Cuban Spanish is the dominate language in South Florida for even the less-than-elderly population.
If relations between Cuba and the US were “normalized” and trade barriers torn down, the island’s economy would improve and with it its dependence on Russia. The South Florida Cubans who claim that they want to “go home” would no longer have an excuse to stay in the US. The island’s mix of communism and capitalism seems to have no negative effect on Canadians who are allowed to visit Cuba. I have heard no talk from Canada about returning visitors pressing for a communist (form of) government in Canada.
The only other people who stand to benefit from a continuing embargo on Cuba, besides cigar makers in Tampa FL, are sugar cane and beet growers who would have to compete with Cuban sugar cane.
Politically, aside from the Cubans in South Florida, there seems no reason to prevent social intercourse with the island nation.
It’s not going to go away.
Its government will never be a sustainable US-style democracy – the US has several times tried to force our understanding of democracy on Cuba and it always is quickly replaced by a dictatorship that seems better suited to the Cubans by the Cubans. It may surprise some Americans, but not every one wants to be American look-alikes.
It won’t make South Florida’s Cubans happy, but since he’s a lame duck anyway, perhaps President Obungler could issue an executive order to cancel another Democrat’s executive order and lead the way to normalization of relations with the US’ neighbor to the south.
Of course there is no guarantee the State Department will DO what a president instructs it – moving the US embassy to Jerusalem is a good – albeit sad – example of how State does what it wants despite congressional and presidential instructions.
