Skip Navigation

Reform with Cuban Characteristics: On the American Mindset

December 17, 2014: the day President Obama ended the 53-year suspension of diplomatic relations with Cuba, that tiny Caribbean island of rum, sun and Chevys. Like a shot heard ‘round the world, the national and international media went wild. The renewed diplomatic relations and normalized trade relations is a coup for the Obama Administration and the Castros, much to the chagrin of Republicans and anti-Castro groups. A significant move, it should serve as a call for nuanced understandings of Cuba and attempts to learn about our neighbor.

President Obama can only do so much to reestablish a working relationship with Cuba. The statement renewed diplomatic relations, meaning each nation will reopen its embassy, while stating that Secretary of State John Kerry will review Cuba’s designation on the US list of states sponsoring terrorism. Some travel restrictions and banking protocols have been shifted and eased, primarily permitting cultural group exchanges and the ability to open a bank account in Cuba.  However, ending the trade embargo entirely has to be an act of Congress. Tourism and complete trade will be decided by congressional action to lift the trade embargo.

Among the excitement and backlash it is clear the United States as a people has very little knowledge by which to evaluate possible new interactions: most coverage continues to be political and economic. Major news sources have been publishing travel guides for Cuban tourism – the immediate impulse to visit, and to consume. Cuba is #2 in “52 Places to Go in 2015” in the New York Times, even though removal of tourism travel restrictions has yet to be decided by Congress. Whatever media “personal interest” pieces and profiles are economically oriented to focus on Cuban’s attempts at business and advancement.

Cuba is entering new era with the United States, or rather, the United States is entering a new era with Cuba. Visiting the island is much heralded as a “step back into time” distinguished by crumbling buildings, collector cars, and hand-lettered signs. Beyond topical signs of age, communism itself seems like an aged theory to our generation. Born after the fall of the Berlin Wall, workers’ rights and “the new man” are outdated theories in the century of expanding democracy. Questions only marginally asked are: where are the Cuban people going? Will defection be as desired as significant economic advancement becomes possible without US input? Will Cuba be worth investing in? How will the United States receive Cuban culture and vice versa? There is a whole world of Cuban baseball, music and film unknown to Americans; Cuban slang, writing and food cloistered.

Misunderstandings and stagnation has been a significant trend in the long history between the United States and Cuba. As I previously wrote, Cuba maintains it is a democracy – whatever arguments about its constitution’s validity aside. The point is that waiting around for the “change” the United States is so adamant on seeing has proven ineffective. Instead of pressuring the Castro regime into renouncing communism and graciously returning seized American property, the United States has created a closed economic environment and therefore one of hardship for the Cuban people. Florida Republicans stick to this narrative, however. Marco Rubio stated, “appeasing the Castro brothers will only cause other tyrants from Caracas to Tehran to Pyongyang to see that they can take advantage of President Obama’s naiveté,” while John Boehner stated, “relations with the Castro regime should not be revisited, let alone normalized, until the Cuban people enjoy freedom.” A major shortcoming in this thinking is a failure to understand the continued dissociation between the Cuban government and the Cuban people. It remains true that the Castros are in power, have been in power, and will likely remain in power until they die. The Communist Party and the Castros are by far not the ideal leadership, but as President Obama’s initiative shows, it is no longer practical to victimize an entire country. As the Council on Foreign Relations states, “to make such a [diplomatic] shift, however, Washington must move past its assumption that Havana prefers and adversarial relationship with the United States.” In most ways, it is stagnation on the part of Washington that is the status quo, opposed to that on the part of Havana.

Obama’s changes – first in 2009 with eased travel for Cubans and Americans and now in 2014 with diplomatic relations – will see a renewed relationship with Cuba. The United States has a long history in the Caribbean and was intimately involved with Cuba pre-1959 (which is why, of course, the nationalization of property and slap in the face of communism hurt the United States so much, like an ex-girlfriend becoming a Republican and hanging out with your nemesis). The embargo instituted in 1962 by President Kennedy has enforced more than a trade hiatus but also an information embargo. We as the American society know next to nothing about what Cuban people experience on a day-to-day basis. We may think we know because we have a robust telecommunication system and access to Internet that Cubans do not, but our information skews to hardships, dissidents, and Castro death rumors. Conversely, Cubans digest conspiracy rumors, notice of defectors, and Washington’s denouncements of their government.

Though the election of Raúl Castro to the presidency in 2008 may be disputed, he, more than his brother, has instituted numerous economic and political shifts. Migration has eased, private business has been (marginally) allowed, and economic advances attempted. None of these moves have been perfect, best labeled “reform with Cuban characteristics,” but the change is indisputable. Subtle shifts on the island are the ability to refer to the Castros by name, no longer necessary to indicate “military” affiliated by tapping one’s shoulder; increased travel for families living in the United States; the ability to listen to songs previously classified as ‘anti-Revolutionary.’ Today, excitement is palpable. Official Cuban newspaper, Granma, reports on US agriculture’s creation of a coalition to end the embargo, interested in Cuban markets, and celebrated the New Year as a “Year of Action in Washington.” Friends of mine in Cuba are alternately on high alert for new ways of engaging economically with the diplomatic shift and expressing a “trust in change.”

Cuba is defined by more than its government. Republicans and anti-Castro sentiment could repeal Obama’s normalization of relations or block further progress through spending bills and nominations. This would be a massive mistake. It is easy to ignore and inhibit a country that is known only for its infamous leadership. It is easy to ignore a country that inhabits a historical void due to a stagnating embargo. Lack of depth and nuance in reporting on Cuba has only exacerbated the American public’s view. With luck, further coverage of the island will be met with political and economic progress.

About the Author

Emma Moore is a senior IR concentrator with a focus in Latin America. Her semester abroad in Cuba fuels her research interests in political symbolism, military anthropology, and diplomacy. She has also explored issues of HIV and public health during an internship with UNICEF last summer. She enjoys writing creative nonfiction and salsa dancing in her free time.

SUGGESTED ARTICLES