[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 66 (Monday, May 19, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E960]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      A NEW POLICY NEEDED FOR CUBA

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, May 16, 1997

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to bring to my colleagues' 
attention my monthly newsletter on foreign affairs from April 1997 
entitled ``A New Policy Needed for Cuba.''
  I ask that this newsletter be printed in the Congressional Record.
  The newsletter follows:

                      A New Policy Needed for Cuba

       For more than three decades, the United States has 
     embargoed Cuba in an unsuccessful effort to force Fidel 
     Castro from power. Last year, in the wake of Cuba's brutal 
     shoot down of private U.S. planes in international airspace, 
     Congress passed the Helms-Burton law, which tightened the 
     economic sanctions. Opponents of the law feared it would hurt 
     the Cuban people, not Castro. A year's experience shows they 
     were right. Helms-Burton has helped Castro, weakened his 
     opponents, brought more misery to ordinary Cubans and damaged 
     relations with our closest allies and trading partners. We 
     need a new policy to promote a peaceful transition to 
     democracy in Cuba.


                          Helms-Burton's reach

       The Helms-Burton law tightens the noose on Cuba in two key 
     ways. First, it grants U.S. citizens the right to bring suit 
     in U.S. courts against foreign companies that have invested 
     in or profited from expropriated properties in Cuba. 
     (President Clinton has delayed the effect of this provision.) 
     Second, the law bars from the United States corporate 
     officers, principals, and shareholders (and their families) 
     of any company that invests in expropriated property in Cuba. 
     This law and U.S. policy limits sharply all contact between 
     the United States and the Cuban people.
       By isolating Cuba and tightening sanctions, Helms-Burton is 
     supposed to move Cuba toward democracy. Rather than promoting 
     peaceful change in Cuba, the law is hurting the Cuban people. 
     Castro wants to stay in power, and this law helps him: Using 
     the law as justification, Castro has cracked down on 
     journalists and dissidents, solidifying his own position 
     while suppressing the opposition. Cuba's dissidents refer 
     derisively to it as the Helms-Burton-Castro Act.
       Helms-Burton also gives Castro a new scapegoat for his 
     economic failures. It eases pressure on him to open up the 
     state-run economy. Modest reforms in Cuba before Helms-Burton 
     have since been stymied. Cuba is not moving toward democracy 
     and free markets--it is moving in the opposite direction.


                          Humanitarian impact

       Helms-Burton is also hurting ordinary Cubans. The embargo, 
     tightened in the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act and codified and 
     reaffirmed in Helms-Burton, has had a negative impact on the 
     health of the Cuban people. Licensing requirements and 
     outright prohibitions of sales to Cuba have drastically 
     limited Cuban access to U.S.-produced medicines and medical 
     equipment. According to recent studies, the health of women 
     and children in particular has suffered as a result of Cuba's 
     inability to obtain medicines. While Cuba's health problems 
     are mostly the fault of Castro's disastrous policies, the 
     U.S. denial of medicines and medical supplies has contributed 
     to Cuba's deteriorating health.
       Donations from the American people--who donate more to Cuba 
     than anyone in the world--are also inhibited by current U.S. 
     policy. Humanitarian missions to Cuba must fly through third 
     countries. American citizens cannot send prescriptions or 
     money to their family members in Cuba without an export 
     license. In a country so clearly in need, it cannot be in the 
     interest of the United States to delay or inhibit the 
     provision of humanitarian supplies to Cubans.


                           Rifts in relations

       No country in the world follows the U.S. embargo of Cuba. 
     While Helms-Burton was intended to isolate Castro, it has 
     isolated the United States, creating great rifts with our 
     closest friends and allies. The European Union (EU), Latin 
     America and Canada have condemned Helms-Burton. All object to 
     the extraterritorial application of U.S. law, under which 
     their citizens and companies are subject to penalty in the 
     United States for their actions in Cuba.
       Helms-Burton also spurred a challenge to the United States 
     in the new World Trade Organization (WTO). The United States 
     has persuaded the EU to back away from a WTO case for now and 
     seeks to resolve the dispute through direct negotiations. But 
     if these talks fail, proponents of Helms-Burton want the 
     United States to walk away from any WTO proceeding by arguing 
     Helms-Burton is a national security matter over which the WTO 
     has no jurisdiction. This approach would weaken the 
     international trading system, which benefits the United 
     States, and set a dangerous precedent: Any country could cite 
     national security to justify protectionism, which costs U.S. 
     jobs.
       Helms-Burton has created other tensions. Canada and 
     Mexico--our nearest neighbors and first and third largest 
     trading partners--are contemplating a case against the United 
     States under NAFTA.


                         Rethinking Cuba policy

       The United States should learn from its successful 
     engagement with Eastern Europe. Communist regimes there fell 
     not because they were isolated, but because they were 
     penetrated by people, new ideas, and commerce. Our policy of 
     engagement with China is based on the same view, and we 
     should follow the same approach with Cuba. The Pope, who is 
     traveling to Cuba early next year, is right to engage the 
     Cuban people directly, as he did the people of Eastern 
     Europe. He is not trying to isolate them or coerce them. 
     Washington would be wise to follow. We should repeal Helms-
     Burton, restart direct flights, lift travel and currency 
     restrictions, and begin exchanges, dialogue and humanitarian 
     relief for the Cuban people. Step by step, we should lift the 
     embargo in response to positive change in Cuba.


                               Conclusion

       Helms-Burton has been a mistake. It has not brought change 
     to Cuba. Instead, it has strengthened Castro and inhibited a 
     peaceful transition to democracy and free markets. It has 
     brought hardship to the Cuban people by denying them food and 
     medicine. It has split us from the rest of the hemisphere, 
     and forced us into fights with our allies and trading 
     partners. It has threatened our leadership in the 
     international trading system. Most important of all, it has 
     made it more likely that change, when it comes to Cuba, will 
     neither be peaceful nor democratic.

     

                          ____________________