History and Development of the US and Cuban Relations

As one begins to take a look into the relations amongst different states, what they stand for, how they attempt to protect its borders, and the manner in which they behave towards other states, US and Cuba are amongst those states that tend to be looked at quite often. Furthermore, in the most recent years we can see that it is no secret that there has been a bit of contention between both of these states but what exactly is that cause? What do these relations tell us about what is to come between these states in the near or distant future? In this paper, we will discuss the relation between the US and Cuba and how they interact on international issues such as agriculture, migration, and war.

In order to grasp a better understanding of what contentions arise between both the US and Cuba, we must travel back in time and take a look at the firsts of these relations. The US embargo that was placed by President John F. Kennedy in 1962 was one of the firsts looks at this relation. This embargo was best described in an article titled, “About the U.S. Embargo on Cuba” which goes on to say that, “[the] policy was intended to force Cuba into economic isolation and catalyze a popular movement toward overthrowing the Castro government. It is the longest-enduring trade embargo in history.” Not too long after this embargo policy was put into action, in another article by Sanghro’s, Rafi Raza’s, et al’s titled, “How Did the Tripartite Relationship Among the United States, the Soviet Union and Cuba Lead to the Cuban Missile Crisis and Complicate Efforts to Resolve the Crisis?” Sanghro and his peers would discuss that in the same year of 1962, Cuba and the US, along with the Soviet Union, would debate the issue of missiles causing an even greater contention amongst states, this debate would later go down in history to be commonly known as the Cuban Missile Crisis (CMC) (pp 1).

Sanghro and peers then continue on and discuss the impact that the communist leader of Cuba, Fidel Castro, would have on this crisis and his instigation on initiating the Cuban Missile Crisis. This missile crisis combined with the failed attempts at which the US sought to remove Mr. Castro from his power, would only creating a ripple effect causing more conflicts on other international issues, which only cultivated the hostility amid states for latter times.

To begin with, due to its history, the US and Cuba share many indifferences on various international issues, agriculture being one of those issues of common debate. The embargo that the US placed on Cuba would, “prohibit the majority of imports and exports between the United States and Cuba, with exceptions to exports that support the Cuban people, information dissemination, and humanitarian assistance” (About the U.S. Embargo on Cuba). Throughout the years, governors, executives, and even a sitting US President, Obama, would make a trip to our nearby neighbor Cuba. These trips were made in hopes to help both Cuba and the US be able to gain a better relationship, discuss their differences, and possibly place policies that would only continue to improve the conditions of both states by increasing trade by either diminishing the embargo or in some ways limiting the standards within. Likewise, separate policies, such as the launch of United States Agricultural Coalition for Cuba (USACC) would be placed to attempt alleviate tensions with agriculture and to give a greater opportunity for U.S. ranchers, farmers, and even food companies “to do business in Cuba” (Graddy 50). It was believed that with policies like USACC, that it would “’drive growth in both countries’” ultimately giving the people of Cuba a greater chance of “’access to affordable food’” (Graddy 49).

This policy would also increase choices for Cuban consumers at their local grocery store which would permit Americans access to a new base of customers of all ages, only increasing their profit. A mutually beneficial policy amongst both states, or at least what was aimed for. In 2015, nine US agricultural governors argued with US congress to end the embargo as it would, “’create jobs here at home, especially in rural America, and will create new opportunities for U.S. agriculture’ (Governors 2015)” (Graddy 50) Since the embargo still stands in place today, this outlook that the US agricultural governors pleaded for on US-Cuba agriculture has yet to happen. The main problem that seems to concern these states was the prevention of future systems that could potentially push local manufacturers and producers out of their business. Cuba would later continue to purchase food from other states in the world. This left the US wondering what exactly Cuba was looking for. Cuba did not want to be dependent on the US for a majority of its foodstuff and for this reason, Cuba would later partner with the United Nations Development Programme and European Union in order to invest in multiple assignments that would increase “agricultural production for domestic consumption” (Graddy 52).

Cuba’s eventual goal was to have equal valued trade amongst states in order to provide food for itself. Cuba felt that its farmers would need to go against realist and neoliberal relations to accomplish this goal. Subsequently the US would agree to import Cuban coffee, solely if it was from farmers who were not affiliated with the state. They would do this on the chances that the Cuban people could gain “’control over their own lives and determine their country’s future’” (Graddy 52). Cuba responding that they recognized it as the US attempting to ruin the harmony amongst the Cuban society and that this was simply something that they could not sanction. A question stands amid these states to this day, that being, “Could US-based respect for Cuba’s organic and urban agriculture facilitate Cuban food sovereignty and fair trade terms – or is the agro-ecological movement too peripheral in both Cuba and the US to buck neoliberalizing, agro-industrial dominance?” (Graddy 62).

Let us continue to move forward to the subject of migration. This was yet another international issue in which the US and Cuba have had a bit of contention but later would reach a semi-mutual agreement. Migration was agreed to be a mutually important topic of interest amongst both states in which could, “advanc[e] the process of normali[z]ing bilateral relations” (Valid Alou, 197). Although, due to the US-Cuba embargo being placed it would also restrict the manner in which Americans could travel to the island for pleasure and leisure. It was later down the road, that newer policies would allow Americans to travel to Cuba, but it would have to be under the “12 categories of legal travel” (About the U.S. Embargo on Cuba). Meaning that by only certain means were Americans able to travel to Cuba. This being the US efforts in protecting its people due to recent events such as the Cuban Missile Crisis (CMC). These restrictions would also cause an impact of less touristic income heading towards Cuba. It was not until 1966 in which Fidel Castro would release a speech that claimed that members of the Cuban community could head north, towards the United States, at their own free will. Castro would declare that Cubans should not “’need go by stealth’” (Timeline: U.S.-Cuba Relations). It is more than certain that Cubans were skeptical of this speech and almost feared for their lives, nonetheless, many Cubans fled to the United States in search of a better opportunity.

Shortly after this addressed speech the US President, Lyndon B. Johnson, would open its borders to the Cuban community in which thousands of Cubans would mainly travel to the southernmost part of Florida in attempts to seek asylum. It was not until the latter part of 1966, that President Johnson would place a law that authorized Cubans to pursue permanent residency after they had reached the United States and had been here for after just one year (Timeline: U.S.-Cuba Relations).

In the year 1980, on April 20th, Castro would agree to continue to let Cubans leave Cuba but only if they had ties in the United States that would help them, i.e. family, friends, etc. Communist Leader, Castro, would do this by shipping them off on boatlifts named the Mariel. On these ships would be over 125,000 Cubans that would flee to Florida on over 1,700 Mariel boats. These were considered to be times that, “overwhelm[ed] the U.S. Coast Guard and immigration authorities” (Glass).

Last but not least, war amid both of these states has been on a tight rope. Along with many other states, a gain for more power still strives in the mist of these states, continually causing confliction and being in a Cold War like state.

Upon taking a brief tour on selected relations between Cuba and the US, along with the most recent events, it is hard to say what is to hold for the future amid these states. On one hand, we have former President Obama signing an agreement to allow more free travelling to Cuba, a bit of an easier routine for Americans and vice versa for Cubans, in attempts to rebuild a better relation and allow more leniency among trade and its people with Cuba. On the other hand, we have President Trump retracting that agreement just earlier this year which has created more hostility between states that could lead to a more difficult attempt to mend relations.

Who knows what will happen during this new election, or what future leaders will do to either work towards a more tolerable environment or instill yet more hostility between the US and Cuba? For these reasons it can be hard to tell what the future holds along with the fact that every leader will act as they see fit.