Published Monday, July 26, 1999, in the Miami Herald

A United Front Could Press for Change in Cuba

U.S. embargo remains effective bargaining chip; Helms-Burton isn't.

Forty-six years ago today, a group of armed rebels led by Fidel Castro took aim against Cuban dictator Fulgencio Batista by attacking the Moncada military barracks near Santiago de Cuba. Though that first attack failed miserably, the rebels succeeded in routing Batista from power in 1959. The Cuban people have been suffering a relentless dictatorship since.

But there is an important change today. International opinion is more clear-eyed than ever before about Cuba's reality. As Canada and the European Union found out firsthand: Cuba's regime tramples human rights, has no intention of giving up absolute power and takes good-faith engagement as a sign of weakness.

That's why last week's report by Human Rights Watch, Cuba's Repressive Machinery, is worth considering, though its conclusion is wrong. It's suggestion that the international community -- namely the United States, Canada, Europe and Latin America -- unite to press for change in Cuba makes solid good sense. But the group's recommendation that the United States should first lift its embargo does not.

The embargo should remain until there exists in Cuba labor protections, political freedom and respect for human rights. U.S. allies can hardly disagree with that position and might now be persuaded to join it. But an incentive to do so would be for Congress to repeal the extra-territorial provisions of the Helms-Burton law, which more than any other Cuba sanction has alienated the United States from international friends. That law attempts to tell those countries how to conduct their business abroad -- an arrogant, if not illegal, measure signed into law more to retaliate against Cuba for shooting down unarmed U.S. rescue planes than for sound policy reasons.

Ironically, calls for ending the U.S. trade embargo are increasing at a time when more and more foreign investors complain about being ripped off in Cuba. Frankly, businesses that wish to deal with the devil richly deserve their returns, and we'd be content to leave them to their fate were their investments not also harming ordinary Cubans.

How so? Because the communist regime is Cuba's only employer. Foreign investors must pay the regime in hard dollars for workers; the regime then pays the workers a pittance in pesos, in effect skimming the profits to fuel the government's repressive machinery. Even independent labor unions are illegal in the so-called workers' paradise.

It does no good to try to engage diplomatically with the Cuban government in the goal of easing repression. If Canada's and Europe's experience teaches anything, it's that Cuba's regime responds only when pressed to the wall. It will allow enough enterprise and foreign investment to stay afloat, but will clamp down at any point when it fears control slipping.

Amoral states cannot be reasoned with. Trust does not work. They have to be pressured, forced and threatened into doing the right thing. That's what the United States has to explain to the international community. Our best bargaining chip with Cuba is economic sanction. It would be foolish to give it away now.