US Should Not Continue Tightening the Economic Grip on Cuba

Your Easy Articles Belong Here...

You Are Here:

Word Count: 551 || Total views: 19

Article

US Should Not Continue Tightening the Economic Grip on Cuba

The US government is one of the three countries in the world that have initiated and maintained the Cuba blockage. Specifically, only US, Israel and Uzbekistan are the rejecting the voice of the United Nations General Assembly to seize this type of trade treatment. More cases appear every year in the news regarding the US embargo consequences on the lives of millions of Cubans. Food, medicine and other important supplies are withheld from the citizens of this island due to its political history and recent communist upheaval that led Fidel Castro in power. But although the General Assembly of the United Nations approved a resolution, condemning the economic blockade that the US has applied to Cuba for more than 35 years, the situation remains almost unchanged.

Some critics consider the Cuban resolution not only a logical decision but actually one of great importance for the Cuban citizens' well-being. Health personnel reported an increase in some infectious diseases, an increase in iron-deficiency anemia among pregnant women and young children, and a rise in the incidence of low-birth-weight babies. The Ministry of Public Health attributes these changes, to problems in importation of food supplies; and that the neuropathy epidemic, which appeared in late 1991 in Cuba, is probably partly the result of nutritional deficiencies.

But in order for the Cuban situation to improve, a company has to be able to invest in such a challenging environment without being excluded from tremendously important markets like that of the US. On the other hand, the possibility of Cuba making any product or service purchases, especially medical ones from the United States, will remain a distant "dream" as long as the embargo is in place, according to the government of Fidel Castro. Thus, under the current circumstances, given the absence of normal commercial relations or transportation mechanisms between the two countries, "it is not practical or viable to speak of such transactions," the Cuban Minister of Public Health, Carlos Dotres, had said in 2000. This fact is further supported by the fact that there is currently great difficulty in purchasing products since there are no commercial flights between the two countries and ships that dock in Cuba are prohibited from visiting the US ports for the following six months.

Meanwhile, the regulations accompanying the decision to streamline procedures for licensing purchases of supplies and health care equipment, rather than making trading more flexible, have in fact created more obstacles, according to local experts. The seller, for example, must oversee the product until it reaches its final destination, which according to U.S. policy may not be linked to the Cuban government or be used in biotechnological production under any circumstances. The U.S. companies that Cuba has contacted, often back away from completing the sale when they realize that they must account for the destination of their exports and who they will benefit.

After carefully studying and analyzing this county's case, it is only logical to conclude that the United States embargo should not continue to force the Cuban citizens to search for another country and especially US as their new permanent residence. The US will not act wisely by tightening further the economic grip on Cuba as the opposite, according to business experts, can result in numerous advantages for the US.