To isolate Cuba means not to understand the problem

After decades of a limited dialogue, the United States is approaching utterly unique chance for normalizing relations with Cuba as the Venezuelan Comandante Hugo Chávez dies. Loss of a chief proponent of “Socialism for 21st Century” will undoubtedly have implications for U. S. foreign policy towards the Castro regime that is currently crumbling apart. Therefore Washington will need to adopt rational policy objectives to fasten transition process in Cuba before it goes off the track.

Departure of one leader does not usually affect other countries in the region that much. However, there has not been more favorable time in post-Cold War era for supporting establishment of regime change in the Cuban island. Recent touring across Europe and Latin America made by Yoani Sanchez, most vocal Cuban dissident and blogger, has signaled a significant meltdown of fading repressions. Meanwhile, U. S. government should effectively respond to these little changes.

First and foremost, America will have to engage in revamping embargo issue. Sanctions for bilateral exporting and importing have been in place since 1960s when Fidel Castro turned the wheel towards the Marxist-oriented world. Since the breakdown of the Soviet empire, U. S. Congress passed legislation (Torricelli Act, Helms-Burton Act, Trade Sanction Reform and Export Enhancement Act) to codify the embargo, which also entailed forbidding American companies to trade with Cuba, travel ban for American tourists and prohibition of all credit and debit transactions or financing by U. S. banks. Yet, such a stance leaves both countries stuck in Cold War battling and does not really correspond with the needs and aspirations of the new millennium. If the Congress repeals what is in Cuba called a “blockade”, numbers of NGOs, private entrepreneurs and other independent actors will infest the island with investments and certainly ignite pressure also for political reforms.

Since the presidency of Ronald Reagan, Cuba has been annually updated in the list of state-sponsored terrorism. In fact, this accounts to law of inertia rather than to some elaborate move. Havana no longer provides either material or verbal support to Colombian FARC rebels or Basque ETA terrorists. President Obama should immediately insist on de-listing Cuba from this outlaw list, otherwise mutual compromise will not be reached in long years to come.

One of most difficult tasks is to convince a numerous community of Cuban expatriates in the United States that both sides might benefit from future cooperation. So far, Cuban-Americans, who also represent a powerful lobbyist group in U. S. presidential elections, have been financing campaigns for many influential politicians such as Senator Marco Rubio or Bob Menendez who in exchange for money block any incoming legislation relating to sanctions freeze vis-à-vis Cuba. Now, Cuban-Americans, for the first time, officially declared will to reverse their posture over embargo, which is at least some positive step.

Of course, not only Washington should take all blame on itself. Cuba under the Castros still remains to be authoritarian or semi-authoritarian regime allowing one-party system that excludes any opposition voices. Although Raúl Castro recently eased out travel ban for Cuban citizens, demands for freedom of speech, assembly and political participation are likely to be inaudible. In 2012, number of political arrests skyrocketed to more than 6,600 in comparison to 4,123 in 2011 and 2,074 in 2010, which shows that Cuba is really reformulating its tactics from long-term detention to short-time intimidation as well as transferring the troublesome abroad.

Nonetheless, there is a breeding ground for regime change inside the Communist Party itself. Raúl Castro, in power since 2008, announced his second term as a president starting in February 2013 will be finished until 2018. Even though we cannot precisely predict whether he steps down or not, due to his age succession process will come closer. His potential successor Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez, elected first deputy president, is a 52-year old technocrat who did not personally take part in the Castro Revolution and now appears to be more open to political transformation and foreign negotiations.  

Again, like in 1990s Cuba lost its paramount ideological and material donor, similarly today its main source of subsidized oil will be left at hazard. Whoever wins the upcoming elections in Venezuela, he will need to proceed to severe spending cuts in hugely undiversified industry, which eventually affects many countries around.       

In the situation of devastated economy, downgraded human rights and the state when old generals of high trusted revolutionary forces might take the lead over a peaceful transition in Cuba, the United States will need to counter such development. Rather than funding subversive groups President Obama must submit a much broader concept for enhancement of bilateral relations.