Advertisers:
advertise on this site


Steve Clemons interviews Eli Pariser

Former Executive Director of MoveOn.org, Eli Pariser discusses his new book "The Filter Bubble" and how the architecture of the internet is evolving to match our interests and filtering out information that might challenge our opinions.

Steve Clemons on Obama's Approach to Libya

Steve Clemons argues that in addittion to being ineffectual militarily, a no-fly zone will change the narrative of the Libyan uprising and shift the focus from the decisions of the Libyan rebels to the actions of Western nations.

Ian Bremmer On the War Between States and Corporations

Eurasia Group President Ian Bremmer discusses the political and economic impacts of the economic recession, as well as rising economic powers.

More videos are available on the Video Archives Page

The Washington Note is now a member of the Political Insiders advertising network:
Find out more...

VA Loan and VA Refinance
Information from VA Mortgage Center



ADVERTISE SEND FEEDBACK OR TIPS CONTACT DETAILS
Support The Washington Note

Using PayPal

Neocon-Realist Collaboration on Ending Cuba Embargo?

Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Wednesday, Nov 11 2009, 9:13AM

cuban face.jpgPoland's Foreign Minister Radoslaw "Radek" Sikorski, husband of Washington Post editorial writer (and Polish cuisine expert) Anne Applebaum, is a compelling, brilliant, eclectic political intellectual who I admire a great deal.

In part, I admire Sikorski because while tenacious and committed to his own analysis and views, he maintains an open mind; he listens; and while tenacious, he debates his intellectual opponents without going into the gutter. And he is occasionally unpredictable in all the right ways.

One way that he surprised me when he was running the New Atlantic Initiative at the American Enterprise Institute -- then the institutional beating heart of America's neoconservative movement -- he wrote a piece for National Review that called for an end to the US embargo of Cuba. It was called "Travels in Fidel-Land."

radek_sikorski_fryzura_450.jpgAn expert in the illiberalism and despotism of the former Soviet empire, Sikorski had long argued that people to people contact, exchange, free commerce and the like open up a society and make it much more difficult for a dictatorship to remain in power.

Sikorski gets it. The intent of his article then was to focus on altering the internal dynamics of the Cuban state, but to do so not by overt meddling but from the power of the American marketplace and from the constructive collision of American liberal ideas with the hopes and aspirations of Cuban citizens.

From my progressive realist perch, I think that the US has tied itself into self-defeating knots with five decades of a failed embargo and a regime change obsession with Cuba that has gone nowhere.

I don't think that the embargo has produced results that have served the US national interest and have decreased American leverage in Cuba and Latin America. I think that removing restrictions on the freedom of Americans to travel and dropping the embargo eventually will have profound consequences on the political realities in Cuba and the United States. Both ways.

I don't share the objective that many neoconservatives, even Radek Sikorski, have of fundamentally altering the internal arrangements of other countries -- but I recognize that with an end to the embargo against Cuba -- what Cubans call "the blockade" -- that possibility exists and may even be probable. But that's not the wave of change that is the American government's right or role to surf -- it is the Cuban people's.

Here is a key clip from Sikorski's "Travels in Fidel Land":

The standoff between the U.S. and Cuba seems ultimately not just political, but also psychological. Cubans seem to think that they get noticed by big brother only when they stick him in the eye. Americans seem determined to put the little one in his place. How else do you explain the silliness of barring your citizens from visiting a country you are not actually at war with, or of imposing fines for importing Cuban cigars? We didn't cease to enjoy caviar even at the height of the Gulag.

The law should not be an ass, and the U.S. can afford to be pragmatic in its policy toward a country that no longer poses a threat. As Mark Falcoff points out in his brilliant Cuba: The Morning After, to keep the embargo while granting Cubans privileges in immigrating to the U.S. is politically self-contradictory: It gives the regime an excuse for failure while simultaneously helping it get rid of its internal opposition. . .

But if neither Old Europe's appeasement nor the U.S. embargo is likely to succeed in changing the regime, perhaps we need a coordinated transatlantic approach that would build on methods that have worked in the past. Human contact across the Iron Curtain was crucial in maintaining the conviction on the other side that democracy and free markets are superior to Communism: Fulbright scholarships that were granted to dissidents and nomenklatura alike helped to create alternative elites and weaned Communists off their zeal.

Sikorski has kept his own government of Poland on this track he articulated five years ago by instructing his Ministry's Ambassador to vote along with 184 other nations against the US Embargo of Cuba in the United Nations a week and a half ago.

-- Steve Clemons



« Previous Article - What Can America Offer Its Allies?
» Next Article - Interesting Diplomacy Tidbits for US-Cuba Watchers

Reader Comments (1) - post a comment

Posted by nadine, Nov 16 2009, 5:53PM - Link

"I don't share the objective that many neoconservatives, even Radek Sikorski, have of fundamentally altering the internal arrangements of other countries --"

You don't share the objective? It's one thing to consider it impractical, but this implies that you are perfectly happy as a matter of principle to leave totalitarian systems as they are, no matter how many starve, suffer, or die under them. Could you explain to me what is "progressive" about this stance? Would you feel the same if Cuba were fascist instead of communist?

Some days it seems like the old realpolitik paleo-conservatives and the progressives have just switched places in foreign policy.

Leave a comment:


(required)
(required)
- only for verification, not for display or any other use.

(required)

Type the characters you see in the picture above.


The Washington Note - Steven ClemonsHome - About - Archives - Published - Recommended - Advertise - Privacy Policy - Contact
THIS SITE IS COPYRIGHT © 2010 THE WASHINGTON NOTE. ALL RIGHTS ARE RESERVED.
En ligne pas cher tadalafil 20mg acheter cialis sans ordonnance en France les informations relatives au mode d'action et les effets secondaires. Le jeu en ligne est devenu une industrie millions de dollars avec des joueurs de partout dans le monde des paris sur les jeux de casino en ligne. La gamme exclusive de jeux de casino soutenu par caractéristiques exceptionnelles et des avantages a surpassé le glamour de casinos terrestres. Même les gens qui n'ont jamais été à un casino sur terre, ou joué tout jeu de casino jamais, deviennent attirés par le monde exceptionnel de jeux en ligne. Vous pourriez vous demander ce qui rend le jeu en ligne si populaire, quand il n'y a pas de concessionnaire réel, pas de vraie foule, pas de serveuses glamour et pas de boissons gratuites. Ci-dessous sont cinq raisons fondamentales pour lesquelles un grand nombre de joueurs de casino se dirigent vers les casino en ligne aujourd'hui. Le Casino en ligne contient également un certain nombre de formateurs de jeu pour les jeux les plus populaires de casino en ligne! Vous pouvez jouer gratuitement ici sur le site et recevoir des conseils de stratégie de l'entraîneur sur le chemin. Notre dévotion au jeu en ligne nous met en mesure de vous proposer les meilleures affaires en bonus avec les meilleurs casinos en ligne. Cela signifie plus d'argent dans votre poche. Restez branchés pour les bonus de casino plus rentables et les promotions à venir.