Cuba debate has come too far to relapse

Just a few months ago, a leaked memo — not an uncommon occurrence in today’s political climate — made its way from Washington D.C., to the pages of several prominent newspapers. But rather than emanating from the White House, this document originated in Cuban-American Representative Mario Díaz-Balart’s office.

The memo proposed a list of prerequisites for the normalization of relations with Cuba to continue. Cuba, it argued, should completely restructure its political system, hold free and fair elections, adhere to international human rights standards, and reimburse the United States for all nationalized property, all within 90 days. Otherwise, Díaz-Balart contended, President Trump should completely roll back President Obama’s policy of engagement with the Cuban government. Cuba, he insisted, should also be placed again on the State Sponsor of Terrorism list, albeit for no readily apparent reason. These were essentially the same demands the U.S. had imposed on Cuba over almost sixty years, and all to no effect.

When compared to the contents of that wish list, President Trump’s announcement indicates just how far the Cuba policy debate has moved, despite intense pressure from Representative Díaz-Balart and Sen. Marco Rubio. Many of the gains of normalization remain intact. At best, this is a partial victory for those who hoped to reverse increased bilateral ties.

And yet, some of the changes proposed will have important and damaging effects. Most notably, the Trump administration will now require that all “people to people” travel to Cuba be conducted in organized groups, rather than on an individual basis. While the president and his supporters have framed this initiative as a better way to support the Cuban people, it will do the exact opposite.

Individual U.S. travelers utilize privately-rented rooms at a higher rate than visitors from any other country. Beyond lodging, many small businesses (restaurants, shops, etc.) depend on U.S and other visitors for their livelihood. Group tours, by contrast, require U.S. travelers to participate in programs overseen by the Cuban government. So, rather than allowing real paths for citizen-to-citizen exchange that support Cuba’s private sector, this measure directly targets their bottom line.

Furthermore, it is tendentious to purportedly champion freedom in Cuba by limiting the freedoms of U.S. citizens. The U.S. does not impose similar travel restrictions on any other country, including North Korea and Iran. Eighty-one percent of Americans, 75 percent of CubanAmericans, and virtually all Cubans support the freedom of U.S. citizens to travel to Cuba. Claiming to support a “better deal” for Americans, Cubans, and CubanAmericans, while ignoring their desires, is highly disingenuous.

We urge Trump to reject these halfmeasures and pursue a policy of full normalization that benefits the U.S. economy, serves U.S. interests, and can help place Cubans on a path to a better future.