|
Published
Friday 16, 2001, in the Miami Herald
Embargo's
impact slight, report says Cuba's trade seen as limited by own
politics
BY
KEN GUGGENHEIM
Associated Press
WASHINGTON
-- U.S. sanctions on Cuba have cost Americans less
than $1 billion a year in exports and have had a similarly
minimal impact on the communist island, according to the
most comprehensive federal study ever of the embargo's
impact.
The
International Trade Commission report, sent Thursday to the
House Ways and Means Committee but not released publicly,
could provide fodder to those on both sides of the debate
over lifting the 39-year-old trade embargo. An executive summary
was obtained by the Associated Press.
Supporters
of the embargo can say the report boosts their argument
that U.S. businesses are losing relatively few trade
opportunities because of the sanctions and that lifting the sanctions would
do little to boost Cuba's weak economy and poor living
conditions.
``U.S.
economic sanctions with respect to Cuba generally had a
minimal overall historical impact'' on the Cuban and U.S.
economies, it said.
Even
without sanctions, Cuba's own policies would limit trade, the
analysts said.
``Cuba
. . . tends to select its trade and investment partners
based on political considerations -- the desire to maintain
economic ties with existing partners and to avoid becoming
economically dependent on a single country -- rather than
economic cost factors,'' the report said.
But
opponents can point to specific instances where the sanctions
have cost the United States trade opportunities -- most
notably rice, where U.S. export losses have been
``significant.''
RICE
IMPORTS
The
sanctions cost U.S. rice growers what had been their leading
market from 1955-58. Without sanctions, U.S. rice imports could
have increased by 3 percent to 5 percent a year, the report said.
And
the study noted that an estimated 1 million U.S. tourists would
visit Cuba each year if the sanctions were lifted -- which
could benefit U.S. travel businesses that book the trips, along
with the Cuban economy.
Overall,
the report estimates the United States would have gained $652
million to $990 million a year in exports if the sanctions
had been lifted. Cuba would have gained $84 million to $167 million
a year.
In
contrast, U.S. companies export more than four times that amount
with the Dominican Republic, a smaller Caribbean country.
EXILE
REACTION
``I
think the ITC basically established what we've been saying
all along, which is that there's a minimal impact on U.S.
business of the sanctions,'' said Dennis Hays, executive vice
president of the Cuban-American National Foundation.
The
study by the independent, nonpartisan agency is believed to
be the first objective attempt by the U.S. government to
study the economic effects of sanctions imposed by President John
F. Kennedy to pressure democratic changes in Fidel Castro's communist
Cuba.
Pressure
has slowly grown in Congress to lift the sanctions, with some
farm-state Republicans joining liberal Democrats in arguing
that sanctions are ineffective and have hurt both Cubans
and Americans. But President Bush has said he favors maintaining the
sanctions.
TOOK
NO SIDES
The
study did not make a recommendation about whether the
embargo should be continued.
Sen.
Max Baucus, D-Mont., who last year unsuccessfully
proposed easing the sanctions, plans to offer a similar
proposal again this year.
``U.S.
policy-makers need to take a long hard look at our policy
-- one that is more than 10 years out of date,'' Baucus
spokesman Michael Siegel said. ``It only serves to
hurt the Cuban people and punish U.S. businesses and
it should be repealed.''
John
Kavulich, president of the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic
Council, said the study's conclusions on the embargo's
impact can be viewed from different perspectives: from those who looking
at the sanctions' effect on the two nations' economies and
those who consider how individual businesses may be
affected.
``For
some it's not significant. For others it will be and
they'll both have a legitimate point,'' he said.
Copyright 2001 the
Miami Herald.
Republished here with the permission of the Miami Herald. No further
republication or redistribution is permitted without the written
approval of The Miami Herald.
|