WFI 13

Pre Camp

1
Cuba Af

Cuba Af
Cuba Af........................................................................................................... 1
1AC............................................................................................................... 2
1AC Plan.................................................................................................. 3
1AC Solvency.......................................................................................... 4
1AC Advantage Economy......................................................................6
1AC Advantage Democracy Promotion...............................................11
1AC Advantage Oil Drilling..................................................................17
1AC Advantage Hemispheric Relations...............................................22
Advantage Democracy Promotion............................................................31
Democracy Promotion Inherency Transition Now................................32
Democracy Promotion Solvency New Strategy Key............................33
Democracy Promotion AT: Emboldens Hardliners..................................36
Democracy Promotion Internal Link Latin American key to Global
Democracy Promotion..............................................................................38
Democracy Promotion Impact Terrorism.............................................40
Democracy Promotion Impact Laundry List........................................42
Democracy Promotion Impact Economic Growth................................43
Democracy Promotion Impact War.....................................................44
Democracy Promotion Impact Laundry List........................................45
Advantage Economy................................................................................. 46
Economy Solvency Spurs Growth.......................................................47
Economy Solvency Relations Solve Economic Interdependence.........49
Economy Solvency Trade Relations.....................................................50
Economy Solvency Hemispheric Relations Key to Economy...............53
Advantage Hemispheric Relations............................................................56
Hemispheric Relations Inherency Embargo Makes US Look Bad.........57
Hemispheric Relations Inherency Now is Key to Boost Relations........58
Hemispheric Relations Solvency Engagement Solves Relations.........59
Hemispheric Relations Impact Laundry List........................................64
Advantage Oil Spills.................................................................................. 65
Oil Spills Inherency Spills Likely Now..................................................66
Oil Spills Solvency Relations Solve Environment.................................67
Oil Spills Solvency Lifting Embargo Solves Spills................................72
Oil Spills Internal Link Global Spread..................................................73
Oil Spills Impact Key Biodiversity Hot Spot.........................................75
Oil Spills Impact Biodiversity...............................................................76
AT: Health Care Disad..................................................................................77
Health Care DA 2AC............................................................................... 78
Health Care DA N/U Ext.........................................................................81
AT: Health Care DA Link Turn Ext...........................................................82

WFI 13
Pre Camp

2
Cuba Af

1AC

WFI 13
Pre Camp

3
Cuba Af

1AC Plan
Plan: The United States federal government should repeal
the embargo against Cuba

WFI 13
Pre Camp

4
Cuba Af

1AC Solvency
[A.] The plan solves it is necessary to lift the embargo in
its entirety
Johnson et al, 2010

[Andy Johnson, Director, National Security Program, Kyle Spector, Policy

Advisor, National Security Program, Kristina Lilac, National Security Program,
Third Way Memo: End the Embargo of Cuba, 9-16-10,
http://content.thirdway.org/publications/326/Third_Way_Memo__End_the_Embargo_of_Cuba.pdf] /Wyo-MB
Although the Obama administration took the largely symbolic step of
extending the embargo for another year under the Trading with the Enemy
Act last year, the President did relax some longstanding restrictions by
taking action to make it easier for Cuban-Americans to visit and send
remittances to family members in Cuba.The administration also recently
hinted at plans to reduce travel restrictions for academic, cultural, and
religious groups later this year.12 While the executive branch can
continue to chip away at these longstanding restrictions, the law
requires that Congress will ultimately need to pass legislation to
repeal the embargo. Under existing law, established by the HelmsBurton Act, the embargo cannot be lifted until the Cuban people
democratically elect a new government and the transition government
is in place. While President Obama could take an initial step by refusing to
issue the annual extension of Cubas national emergency status under the
Trading with the Enemy Act,13 lifting the embargo will ultimately
require that Congress pass and the President sign into law
legislation to repeal both the Torricelli Act and the Helms-Burton
Act. Passing HR 4645 would be a positive first step, but Congress will
need to take further action to see that the embargo is lifted in its
entirety.

[B.] Lifting the embargo solves trade relations, serves to

normalize relations with Cuba, and boosts the US image
with allies and Latin American powers
Zimmerman, 2010

[Chelsea, Barnard College, Rethinking The Cuban Trade Embargo: An

Opportune Time To Mend a Broken Policy,
http://www.thepresidency.org/storage/documents/Fellows2010/Zimmerman.p
df] /Wyo-MB
This proposal sets forth multiple reasons for the failure of the U.S. policy of economic sanctions to
promote democracy in Cuba, but I will now focus on the costs and benefits of a gradual modification of

The U.S. needs to adopt a new approach to Cuba that is

not based on sanctions, passivity, and waiting. The U.S.
government should instead take a more pragmatic approach when
trying to encourage change in Cuba, especially with the opportunity
created by the change in leadership of both countries and with the
recent reforms announced by Raul Castro which will over time
eliminate the states information monopoly. The opportunities
involved in gradually loosening trade restrictions with Cuba and
the current policy.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

5
Cuba Af

promoting cooperation on issues of mutual benefit far outweigh the

risks. Benefits for the U.S. in reducing financing restrictions and
travel restrictions with Cuba include the following: 1) U.S.
agribusinesses will benefit from substantial revenue increases
derived from a more significant share of food exports to Cuba, from
reduced transportation costs and delays caused by travel
restrictions, and from the elimination of cumbersome payment
requirements; 2) the U.S. government will benefit from additional
tax revenues on the increase in sales; 3) funds wasted on attempts
to de-legitimize the Castro regime, such as Radio and TV Marti, estimated to
be in excess of $35 million annually, instead can be used for more
productive purposes, such as academic and cultural exchanges; 4) the U.S. Treasurys
administrative expenses of enforcing complex financing restrictions and
investigating illegal U.S. investments and travel to Cuba will be reduced and redirected
to a more practical use, such as investigating terrorist networks
abroad; and 5) improved foreign relations with some of the U.S.s
most important allies including the European Union and OAS
partners will result from the reform measures (Sweig). Ofsetting these benefits
are the costs of enforcement of increased trade activities and travel with Cuba as well as the reality that
these measures will not force the collapse of Cuban communism or result in a rapid transition to a
democratic government. The probability of implementing these changes within the next six months
seems likely. The political strength of the farm lobby has eclipsed the power of Floridas Cuban-American
community, which did not play a significant role in the election of President Obama. Because all of these
reform measures, with the exception of lifting the travel ban, can be adopted through administrative
action rather than Congressional or executive action,1 a political showdown would not be necessary to
VI. Conclusion Relaxing U.S. trade restrictions will
not result in an immediate thaw in relations with Cuba. The Cuban
governments response may be slow, as Raul Castro will need to
factor in the changes in U.S. policy into the larger equation of
Cuban recovery and economic reform. Moving from a policy of
isolation to one of investment and engagement will send a diferent
message to Cuba and sets the stage for fruitful trade possibilities
and for normalizing relations between the two countries. In addition,
the United States will be sending a signal to other Latin America
about its willingness to view the world in cooperative terms. The

accomplish these measures.

current U.S. policy toward Cuba has been driven by history, without taking into account political and

A policy based on sanctions and regime

change is out of touch with the times, and is inconsistent and
flawed in its intent and application. The trade embargo imposed on
Cuba reflects bad economics, bad business, bad national security
strategy, and bad global politics, and warrants a gradual
revamping through revised regulations and, ultimately,
Congressional action.
economic interests of both countries.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

6
Cuba Af

1AC Advantage Economy

[A.] US economic growth is tepid now, despite signs of
recovery the economy has a long way to go, expansion of
trading partners is key to growth
China Daily, 6-15-13
[Staf, IMF: US economy to grow 2.7 percent in 2014,
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2013-06/15/content_16624533.htm]
/Wyo-MB
WASHINGTON - The International Monetary Fund (IMF) on Friday lowered
its forecast of U.S. economic growth to 2. 7 percent next year, 0.3
percentage point lower than its April prediction against the
backdrop of the government spending cuts. The scaling down in the forecasted

economic growth rate was largely due to the ongoing automatic budget cuts across the federal
governmental departments, also known as sequester, which will be afecting economic recovery next year,

The U.S. economic

growth is expected to slow to 1.9 percent this year owing to an
excessively rapid pace of fiscal deficit reduction, the same as its April prediction,
IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said at a press conference Friday.

the IMF said in a concluding statement after an annual review of U.S. economic and financial situations.

"The U.S. recovery has remained tepid over the past year, but
underlying fundamentals have been gradually improving ." The modest
growth rate of 2.2 percent last year reflected legacy efects from the financial crisis, fiscal deficit reduction,
a weak external environment and temporary efects of extreme weather-related events, noted the

Despite these headwinds, the nature of the recovery

appears to be changing. In particular, home prices and house construction activity have
statement.

rebounded, along with strengthening of household balance sheets and improvement of labor market
conditions, and corporate profitability and balance sheets remain strong, especially for large firms, said the

The U.S. economic recovery is "gaining ground

and becoming more durable," and the housing market and labor
market are doing better, supported by the U.S. Federal Reserve's easy monetary
policy. But the economy still has "way to go" before returning to full
strength, Lagarde told reporters. The ongoing sequester is a major risk for U.S.
Washington-based global lender.

economic growth. Another fiscal worry is doing too little further down the road on fiscal consolidation after
having done too much in the short term, she stressed. The IMF suggested the United States should repeal
the sequester and adopt a more balanced and gradual pace of fiscal consolidation in the short term. The
sequester was included in the August 2011 debt-ceiling package to force lawmakers to come up with a
long-term deficit reduction plan. After the failure to produce such a plan in November 2011, a total of more
than 1 trillion U.S. dollars cuts over a decade were triggered starting this year, or about 109 billion dollars
per year. The Fed's quantitative easing (QE) monetary measures have been "extremely useful" in
bolstering economic growth and should continue. The IMF predicted the Fed to maintain its current asset
purchase program until the end of this year and that the Fed should carefully manage its QE exit plan to

As the legacy of the financial crisis

wanes further, private domestic demand in the world's largest
economy is expected to continue recovering, but weak growth in a
number of trading partners is projected to weigh on U.S. export
growth, according to the statement.
avoid disrupting the markets, Lagarde noted.

[B.] The status quo enforcement of the embargo drains

the US economy
Hanson, Batten, and Ealey, 2013

[Daniel, Dayne, and Harrison, Daniel Hanson is an economics researcher at

the American Enterprise Institute. Dayne Batten is affiliated with the

WFI 13
Pre Camp

7
Cuba Af

University of North Carolina Department of Public Policy. Harrison Ealey is a

financial analyst, It's Time For The U.S. To End Its Senseless Embargo Of
Cuba, 1-16-13, http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/01/16/its-time-forthe-u-s-to-end-its-senseless-embargo-of-cuba/] /Wyo-MB
Despite this progress, the U.S. spends massive amounts of money
trying to keep illicit Cuban goods out of the United States. At least
10 diferent agencies are responsible for enforcing diferent
provisions of the embargo, and according to the Government
Accountability Office, the U.S. government devotes hundreds of
millions of dollars and tens of thousands of man hours to
administering the embargo each year. At the Miami International Airport,
visitors arriving from a Cuban airport are seven times more likely to be
stopped and subjected to further customs inspections than are visitors from
other countries. More than 70 percent of the Treasurys Office of
Foreign Assets Control inspections each year are centered on rooting
out smuggled Cuban goods even though the agency administers
more than 20 other trade bans. Government resources could be
better spent on the enforcement of other sanctions, such as illicit drug
trade from Columbia, rather than the search for contraband cigars and rum.
Yet, estimates of the sanctions annual cost to the U.S. economy
range from $1.2 to $3.6 billion, according to the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce. Restrictions on trade disproportionately afect U.S.
small businesses who lack the transportation and financial
infrastructure to skirt the embargo. These restrictions translate into
real reductions in income and employment for Americans in states like
Florida, where the unemployment rate currently stands at 8.1 percent.

[C.] removing the embargo is key to accessing oil revenue

in Cuba
Fesler, 2009
[Lily, Research Associate The council on hemispheric relations, Cuban Oil:
Havana's Potential Geo-Political Bombshell, Washington Report on the
Hemisphere29. 11. (Jun 18, 2009), Accessed online via Proquest] Wyo-MB
Desperate to end its dependence on oil from the Middle East, United States'
officials are certainly aware of Cuba's oil-producing potential. In its
2004 assessment, the U.S. Geological survey found that Cuba has five
billion barrels of crude oil of its northern shores; Havana claims it
has twenty billion. Five billion barrels would put Cuba on par with
Colombia or Ecuador, while twenty billion barrels would make Cuba's
oil capacity comparable to that of the United States' and place it
among the top fifteen oil reserves in the world. Either way, Cuba's oil
is attracting the attention of oil companies from around the globe. At
the moment, Spain's Repsol, Brazil's Petrobras, and Norway's StatoilHydro are
overseeing exploratory drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. India, Malaysia, Vietnam,
and Venezuela also have signed deals with Cuba. Havana has publicly
stated that it welcomes American investment, but U.S. oil companies
are incapable of proceeding without an official go-ahead from
Washington. As Juan Fleites, vice president of Havana's state oil company
Cubapetroleo, said, "We are open to U.S. oil companies interested in
exploration, production and services." U.S. oil tycoons have shown

WFI 13
Pre Camp

8
Cuba Af

definite interest, but Kurt Glaubitz, a spokesman for Chevron, explained,

"Until trade barriers are removed, Chevron is unable to do business
in Cuba. Companies like us would have to see a change in U.S. policy
before we evaluate whether there's interest." The aforementioned
foreign companies already have contracted for Cuba's twenty-one of the fiftynine ofshore drilling blocks, and another twenty- three blocks are currently
under negotiation by other foreign nations, including Russia and China. A U.S.
Stake in Cuban Oil? It is not too late for the U.S. to develop a stake in
Cuba's nascent oil output. It takes between three and five years to
develop oil reserves, and as of yet, there has been no major oil
discovery of the island. Repsol struck oil in 2004, but not enough to sell
commercially. Several other foreign firms are currently using seismic testing,
which assesses the oil content of potential deposits, after which they will
probably begin exploring in 2010 or 2011. The exploration manager for
Cubapetroleo, Rafael Tenreyro Prez, has called the incoming results from
seismic testing in Cuba's reserves "very encouraging." After lifting the
embargo, U.S. oil companies could most likely work out an
arrangement whereby the U.S. would exchange its reserves with
nearby holdings of foreign companies, allowing the U.S. access to
Cuba's oil even after all of the contracts had been signed. This could
save transportation costs appreciably, because U.S. companies
wouldn't have to go halfway around the world in search of oil
refineries, with Cuba only 90 miles away. U.S. oil equipment and service
companies like Halliburton, however, already have lost the
opportunity to build refineries, pipelines, and ports, sacrificing tens
of millions of dollars in revenue. U.S. companies' oil contracts are
not just significant for their own potential profits, but also for
American consumers' access to reasonably priced neighboring oil.
With oil prices recovering from a December low of $32.40 a barrel back to
around $70 a barrel, access to more oil sources could become a matter
of serious importance.

[D.] Lifting the embargo solves trade relations and boosts

the US economy
Zimmerman, 2010
[Chelsea, Barnard College, Rethinking The Cuban Trade Embargo: An
Opportune Time To Mend a Broken Policy,
http://www.thepresidency.org/storage/documents/Fellows2010/Zimmerman.p
df] /Wyo-MB
Trade levels between Cuba and the U.S. could reach $5 billion
annually by removing the trade embargo, resulting in a boost to
American agribusinesses while also helping to alleviate hunger among
Cubans. A policy environment open to international trade and
investment is a necessary ingredient to sustain higher rates of
economic growth and to promote political freedom through exposure
to new technology, communications, and democratic ideas
(Griswold, 1; Sachs and Warner). Allowing Cuba to more freely import U.S.
food is a means of lowering domestic prices and increasing incomes of the
poor, food availability and domestic production. U.S. companies will
introduce new technologies and production methods, while raising wages

WFI 13
Pre Camp

9
Cuba Af

and labor standards as a result of trading with Cuba. The additional

creation of wealth will help to advance social, political, and
economic conditions independent of the governing authorities in
Cuba. The most economically open countries today are more than three
times as likely to enjoy full political and civil freedoms as those that are
relatively closed (Griswold, 1). Lifting certain trade restrictions would assist
Cuba in its eforts to recover from the damage caused by its recent
hurricanes. If the U.S. exempted construction equipment and agricultural
machinery from the Cuban trade ban through regulatory action, the Cuban
people could benefit from the loosening of restrictions without overhauling
the entire embargo. By allowing free travel to and from Cuba,
potential for the marketing and sale of agricultural and medical
goods would expand enormously, further boosting the economies
of the U.S. and Cuba. The U.S. International Trade Commission
estimated that if travel restrictions to Cuba were lifted, the number
of U.S. travelers would increase from less than 200,000 to between
550,00 and one million annually (U.S. International Trade Commission).
The increase in U.S. visitors would in turn increase demand for
more and higher quality goods and would provide more money for
the government to purchase U.S. goods, according to the Commission
report. Allowing U.S. citizens to travel to Cuba would boost the
tourism industry in the U.S. and create thousands of new jobs. Even
lifting the travel restrictions on groups or individuals directly engaged in U.S.
agricultural sales to Cuba would be a significant advancement.
Business leaders and entrepreneurs from the U.S. would gain a
competitive edge by having the opportunity to travel to Cuba and
becoming familiar with the Cuban market and meting face-to-face
with their Cuban counterparts.

[E.] lifting the embargo solves trade relations with Cuba,

bolsters the economy, and boosts ties to Latin America
Fesler, 2009
[Lily, Research Associate The council on hemispheric relations, Cuban Oil:
Havana's Potential Geo-Political Bombshell, Washington Report on the
Hemisphere29. 11. (Jun 18, 2009), Accessed online via Proquest] Wyo-MB
As the Obama administration slowly inches towards normalizing its
relations with Cuba, pressure is mounting on the new president to
lift the decades-old and universally acknowledged anachronistic embargo.
In order to underline the many impacts of the embargo, this article continues
COHAs ongoing series on U. S. -Cuba bilateral relations. A relic of the Cold
War, the Cuban embargo witnessed the loss of its stated purpose
years ago and is now gratuitously hobbling the diplomacy of Cuba
and the United States. At the same time, Cuba is struggling to pay for
necessary imports and provide energy sources for its people. A lift of the
"blockade," as many Cubans call the embargo, would give Havana
the opportunity to repay some of its debts and aford everyday
necessities. Normalized relations would give the U.S. access to
Cuban oil exploration and drilling, and allow the U.S. to implement
environmental regulations aimed at protecting the Florida coast
from potential oil spills. Enhanced trade with Cuba could generate

WFI 13
Pre Camp

10
Cuba Af

up to $1.9 billion for the U.S.'s cash-strapped economy, and the

image of the U.S. in Latin America undoubtedly would encounter a
much-needed boost. Very few deny that both nations would benefit
from the embargo's end and trade normalization.

[F.] those trade relations allow the United States to

overcome economic decline
Brookings 8
(The Brookings Institution. November. Rethinking. U.S.Latin American
Relations: A Hemispheric Partnership for a Turbulent World
http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/1124_latin_america_partnership.aspx)
The advent of a new administration in Washington opens the door to a fresh look at this increasingly
interdependent relationship. This report is also particularly timely in the context of the current financial

The events of recent

months have demonstrated that the Western Hemispheres
countries remain interdependent; developments in U.S. financial markets are rapidly
crisis, which is having profound regional as well as global implications.

reflected in the LAC region. Stock prices across the region have declined, currencies have weakened, and

The real economy has

sufered as well, and growth forecasts for the region have been
revised downward, especially for those countries that rely more heavily on trade and remittance
the cost of funds for governments and corporations has increased.

flows from the United States, such as Mexico and the Central American and Caribbean nations. In
response, the United States has approved $30 billion in currency swaps for each Mexico and Brazil to help
them stabilize their currencies and meet immediate debt obligations, and the International Monetary Fund
has nearly doubled its limit on loans to developing countries. Most observers believe that the

countries of the LAC region are better prepared to weather the

current global financial crisis than past episodes of financial turmoil.
The regions current account deficit is small, inflation is under
control in most economies, and fiscal conditions have generally
improved. The region has also benefited from high commodity prices
and large capital inflows. Several countries have amassed sizable international reserves. But
the region is not immune from the crisis. Its countries could sufer from a sharp
decline in commodity prices, as well as from a reduction in capital
flows from advanced economies. Also, leading international banks
which have a strong presence in the region and are key players in
financial intermediationcould act as transmission lines for external
shocks. As the crisis unfolds, Latin America remains important to the United
States in at least two respects. If the LAC region grows at rates of
more than 3 percent a yearas the International Monetary Fund currently projectseven
in a weak global economy, its countries will play a valuable role as
buyers of U.S. goods and services, helping the U.S. economy export
its way out of the crisis. Conversely, if the regions economy deteriorates
further, the problems associated with poverty, crime, inequality, and
migration may worsen and could potentially spill across borders . For
the United States, coping with the hemispheric impact of the financial crisis
will be a major policy challenge with economic as well as political
and security implications.

[G.] Economic decline causes protectionism and war

Royal 10JedediahRoyal,DirectorofCooperativeThreatReductionattheU.S.DepartmentofDefense,2010,Economic
Integration,EconomicSignalingandtheProblemofEconomicCrises,inEconomicsofWarandPeace:Economic,Legaland
PoliticalPerspectives,ed.GoldsmithandBrauer,p.213215

WFI 13
Pre Camp

11
Cuba Af

economic decline may increase the likelihood of

external conflict. Political science literature has contributed a moderate degree of attention to the
Less intuitive is how periods of

impact of economic decline and the security and defense behavior of interdependent states. Research in
this vein has been considered at systemic, dyadic and national levels. Several notable contributions follow.
First, on the systemic level, Pollins (2008) advances Modelski and Thompsons (1996) work on leadership

rhythms in the global economy are associated with

the rise and fall of a pre-eminent power and the often bloody transition from one preeminent leader to the next. As such, exogenous shocks such as economic crisis could usher
in a redistribution of relative power (see also Gilpin, 1981) that leads to
uncertainty about power balances, increasing the risk
of miscalculation (Fearon, 1995). Alternatively, even a relatively certain redistribution of power
cycle theory, finding that

could lead to a permissive environment for conflict as a rising power may seek to challenge a declining
power (Werner, 1999). Seperately, Pollins (1996) also shows that global economic cycles combined with
parallel leadership cycles impact the likelihood of conflict among major, medium and small powers,
although he suggests that the causes and connections between global economic conditions and security

theory of trade
expectations suggests that future expectation of trade is a
significant variable in understanding economic conditions and
security behavious of states. He argues that interdependent states
are likely to gain pacific benefits from trade so long as they have an
optimistic view of future trade relations, However, if the expectations of
future trade decline, particularly for difficult to replace items such as energy resources, the
likelihood for conflict increases, as states will be inclined to use force to gain access
to those resources. Crisis could potentially be the trigger for decreased trade
expectations either on its own or because it triggers protectionist moves by interdependent
states. Third, others have considered the link between economic decline
and external armed conflict at a national level. Blomberg and Hess
(2002) find a strong correlation between internal conflict and external
conflict, particularly during periods of economic downturn. They write, The linkages
conditions remain unknown. Second, on a dyadic level, Copelands (1996, 2000)

between internal and external conflict and prosperity are strong and mutually reinforcing. Economic
conflict tends to spawn internal conflict, which in turn returns the favor. Moreover, the presence of a
recession tends to amplify the extent to which international and external conflict self-reinforce each other.
(Blomberg & Hess, 2002. P. 89) Economic decline has been linked with an increase in the likelihood of
terrorism (Blomberg, Hess, & Weerapana, 2004), which has the capacity to spill across borders and lead to
external tensions. Furthermore, crises generally reduce the popularity of a sitting government.
Diversionary

theory suggests that, when facing unpopularity arising

from economic decline, sitting governments have increase incentives
to fabricate external military conflicts to create a rally around the
flag efect. Wang (1996), DeRouen (1995), and Blomberg, Hess, and Thacker (2006) find supporting
evidence showing that economic decline and use of force are at least indirectly correlated. Gelpi (1997),

the tendency
towards diversionary tactics are greater for democratic states than
autocratic states, due to the fact that democratic leaders are generally more susceptible to being
Miller (1999), and Kisangani and Pickering (2009) suggest that

removed from office due to lack of domestic support. DeRouen (2000) has provided evidence showing that
periods of weak economic performance in the United States, and thus weak Presidential popularity, are
statistically linked to an increase in the use of force. In summary, recent economic scholarship positively
correlated economic integration with an increase in the frequency of economic crises, whereas political
science scholarship links economic decline with external conflict at systemic, dyadic and national
levels. This implied connection between integration, crisis and armed conflict has not featured prominently
in the economic-security debate and deserves more attention.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

12
Cuba Af

1AC Advantage Democracy Promotion

[A.] Current policy toward Cuba destroys efective
democracy and humans rights promotion
Amash, 2012

[Brandon, Contributing writer of Prospect Journal of International Afairs at

UCSD, EVALUATING THE CUBAN EMBARGO, 7-22-12,
http://prospectjournal.org/2012/07/23/evaluating-the-cuban-embargo/] /WyoMB
Ayubi, Bissell, Korsah and Lerner suggest that the purpose of sanctions is
to bring about behavior seen as in conformity with the goals and
standards of a society and to prevent behavior that is inconsistent
with these goals and standards (Ayubi 1). These goals and standards,
in the Cuban context, would be democracy and a vested interest in
human rights. However, the sanctions that the United States has
placed on Cuba in the past half century have done little to address the
systematic violations of human rights in Cuba.
3.1: The American embargo is not sufficient to democratize Cuba
and improve human rights. Without the help and support of multilateral
institutions, economic sanctions on Cuba have been inefective. As
other states trade and interact freely with Cuba, the lack of
partnership with America is only a minor hindrance to Cubas
economy. Moreover, the sanctions are detrimental to the United
States economy, as Cuba could potentially be a geostrategic
economic partner. More importantly, since economic sanctions are
not directly related to the goal of improved human rights, the efect
of these sanctions is also unrelated; continued economic sanctions
against Cuba create no incentive for the Cuban government to
promote better human rights, especially when the sanctions do not
have international support. Empirically, it is clear that since its
inception, the policy has not succeeded in promoting
democratization or improving human rights. Something more must
be done in order to improve the situation. 3.2: American sanctions
during the Cold War strengthened Castros ideological position and
created opportunities for involvement by the Soviet Union, thereby
decreasing the likelihood of democratization and improvement in
human rights. Cubas revolution could not have come at a worse time for
America. The emergence of a communist state in the western hemisphere
allowed the Soviet Union to extend its influence, and the United States
rejection of Cuba only widened the window of opportunity for Soviet
involvement. The embargo also became a scapegoat for the Castro
administration, which laid blame for poor human rights conditions on
the embargo policy itself (Fontaine 18 22). Furthermore, as Ratlif and
Fontaine suggest, isolating Cuba as an enemy of democracy during the
Cold War essentially made the goals of democratization in the
country unachievable (Fontaine 30). While the embargo may have
been strategic during the Cold War as a bulwark against
communism, the long-term efects of the policy have essentially
precluded the possibility for democracy in Cuba. Even after the end

WFI 13
Pre Camp

13
Cuba Af

of the Cold War, communism persists in Cuba and human rights

violations are systemic; Americas policy has not achieved its goals
and has become a relic of the Cold War era. The prospects for
democracy and improvement in human rights seem as bleak as ever.

[B.] Removing the embargo bolsters US-Cuban relations

and solve the promotion of democracy and human rights
in Cuba and abroad
Amash, 2012

[Brandon, Contributing writer of Prospect Journal of International Afairs at

UCSD, EVALUATING THE CUBAN EMBARGO, 7-22-12,
http://prospectjournal.org/2012/07/23/evaluating-the-cuban-embargo/] /WyoMB
Although Americas previous policies of intervention, use of force and
economic sanctions have all failed at achieving democratization in
Cuba, not all options have been exhausted. One policy alternative for
promoting democracy and human rights in Cuba that the United
States has not attempted is the exact opposite of the approach it
has taken for the past half century. Namely, the United States should
lift the embargo on Cuba and reopen diplomatic relations in order to
work internationally on improving human rights in Cuba. Unless Cuba,
as a rogue state, is isolated internationally, rather than merely by the United
States, the human rights situation in Cuba may never improve. A fresh
policy of engagement towards Cuba has been delayed long enough.
4.1: Reopening diplomatic relations with Cuba will decrease the
chances of conflict and will promote cooperation between the two
countries economically, politically and socially. Diplomatic relations
and negotiations have proven to be efective in the past in similar
situations, such as the renewed relations between Egypt and Israel
following the Camp David Accords. As Huddleston and Pascual state, a great
lesson of democracy is that it cannot be imposed; it must come from
within. [] Our policy should therefore encompass the political,
economic, and diplomatic tools to enable the Cuban people to
engage in and direct the politics of their country (Huddleston 14). The
mobilization of the Cuban people on the issues of democratization, which
are inherently linked to the human rights violations in Cuba, is a first
step to producing changes in Cuba. American engagement with the
Cuban people, currently lacking under the embargo policy, will
provide the impetus in Cuban society to produce regime change.
Furthermore, integrating U.S.-Cuba relations on a multilateral level
will ease the burden on the United States in fostering democracy
and a better human rights record in the country, as other states will
be more involved in the process. In contrast to a policy of isolation,
normalized relations will allow America to engage Cuba in new
areas, opening the door for democratization and human rights
improvements from within the Cuban state itself. 4.2: With
diplomatic relations in place, the United States may directly promote
human rights in the country through negotiations, conferences,
arbitration and mediation. Providing the support, resources, and
infrastructure to promote democratic systems in Cuba could produce

WFI 13
Pre Camp

14
Cuba Af

immense improvements to the human rights situation in the nation.

Normalizing diplomatic relations with the state will also allow
America to truly support freedom of opinion and expression in Cuba,
which it cannot currently promote under the isolationist policy.
Furthermore, through diplomatic relations and friendly support,
Cuba will be more willing to participate in the international system,
as well as directly with the United States, as an ally. As the United
States, along with the international community as a whole, helps
and supports Cubas economic growth, Cuban society will eventually
push for greater protection of human rights. 4.3: Lifting economic
sanctions will improve economic growth in Cuba, which correlates to
democratization. Empirical evidence shows that a strong economy is
correlated to democracy. According to the Modernization Theory of
democratization, this correlation is a causal link: economic growth
directly leads to democratization. Lifting the current economic
sanctions on Cuba and working together to improve economic
situations in the state will allow their economy to grow, increasing
the likelihood of democracy in the state, and thus promoting greater
freedom of expression, opinion and dissent. 4.4: A policy of
engagement will be a long-term solution to promoting democracy
and improving human rights in Cuba. This proposal, unique in that it
is simply one of abandoning an antiquated policy and normalizing
relations to be like those with any other country, does not present
any large obstacles to implementation, either in the short run or the
long run. The main challenge is in continuing to support such a policy and
maintaining the normal diplomatic, economic and social relations with a
country that has been isolated for such a long period of time. Although
efects of such a policy may be difficult to determine in the short
term, promoting democracy and improving human rights in Cuba are
long-term solutions. As discussed above, engagement with the Cuban
government and society, along with support from the international
community, will provide the spark and guidance for the Cuban
people to support and promote democracy, and thus give greater
attention to human rights violations. 5. Conclusions: Instead of
continued economic sanctions on Cuba, the United States should
reopen diplomatic relations with Cuba, work multilaterally and use
soft power to promote democracy and greater attention to human
rights. This policy approach will decrease the hostility between the
United States and Cuba, and cause Cuba to be more willing to
participate internationally with attention to human rights violations.
After the end of the Cold War, United States foreign policy has found new
directions, and the embargo, as a relic of a diferent time, must be
removed should the United States wish to gain any true ground in
promoting human rights in Cuba.

[C.] Lifting the embargo is key to the credibility of United

States democracy promotion and hemispheric relations
Huddleston and Pascual, 2010
[Vicki and Carlos, Leaders of Advisory group for policy recommendations on
Cuba, Vicki is deputy assistant secretary for Africa at the Department of

WFI 13
Pre Camp

15
Cuba Af

Defense and Carlos is ambassador to Mexico, Learning to Salsa: New Steps in

U.S.-Cuba Relations, Brookings Institutions Press 2010] /Wyo-MB
U.S. policy toward Cuba should advance the democratic aspirations
of the Cuban people and strengthen U.S. credibility throughout the
hemisphere. Our nearly 50-year-old policy toward Cuba has failed on
both counts: it has resulted in a downward spiral of U.S. influence on
the island and has left the United States isolated in the hemisphere
and beyond. Our Cuba policy has become a bellwether, indicating the
extent to which the United States will act in partnership with the
region or unilaterally and inefectually. Inevitably, strategic
contact and dialogue with the Cuban government will be necessary if
the United States seeks to engage the Cuban people. This book proposes a
new goal for U.S. policy toward Cuba: to support the emergence of a
Cuban state where the Cuban people determine the political and
economic future of their country through democratic means. A great
lesson of democracy is that it cannot be imposed; it must come from
within. The type of government at the helm of the islands future will depend
on Cubans. Our policy should therefore encompass the political,
economic, and diplomatic tools to enable the Cuban people to
engage in and direct the politics of their country. This policy will
advance the interests of the United States in seeking stable
relationships based on common hemispheric values that promote the
well-being of each individual and the growth of civil society. To engage
the Cuban government and Cuban people efectively, the United States
will need to engage with other governments, the private sector, and
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). In so doing, U.S. policy toward
Cuba would reflect the hemispheres and our own desire to
encourage the Cuban government to adopt international standards
of democracy, human rights, and transparency.

[D.] Efective democracy promotion is key to solve global

conflict
Lagon, 2011
[Mark, adjunct Senior Fellow for Human Rights Council of Foreign Relations,
February 2011, Promoting Democracy: The Whys and Hows for the United
States and the International Community, http://www.cfr.org/democracypromotion/promoting-democracy-whys-hows-united-states-internationalcommunity/p24090] /Wyo-MB
Furthering democracy is often dismissed as moralism distinct from U.S.
interests or mere lip service to build support for strategic policies. Yet there
are tangible stakes for the United States and indeed the world in the
spread of democracynamely, greater peace, prosperity, and
pluralism. Controversial means for promoting democracy and frequent
mismatches between deeds and words have clouded appreciation of this
truth. Democracies often have conflicting priorities, and democracy
promotion is not a panacea. Yet one of the few truly robust findings
in international relations is that established democracies never go to
war with one another. Foreign policy realists advocate working with other
governments on the basis of interests, irrespective of character, and suggest
that this approach best preserves stability in the world. However, durable

WFI 13
Pre Camp

16
Cuba Af

stability flows from a domestic politics built on consensus and

peaceful competition, which more often than not promotes similar
international conduct for governments.

[E.] Democracy promotion solves terrorism

Curtis, 2011

[Lisa, Senior Research Fellow for South Asia in the Asian Studies Center at
The Heritage Foundation, Championing Liberty Abroad to Counter Islamist
Extremism, 2-9-11,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/02/championing-libertyabroad-to-counter-islamist-extremism] /Wyo-MB
The Obama Administration needs to prioritize the promotion of
democracy and individual freedom as part of its foreign policy
agenda. This is particularly important in Muslim countries where
repression and intolerance can foster development of extremist
movements that feed global terrorism. Recent statements from
President Obama and other senior Administration officials signaling strong
support for democratic development in other countries are
encouraging. The Administration should continue to demonstrate its
commitment to nurturing democratic development both through
public statements and through aid programs that account for the
particular circumstances of individual countries. In doing so, the U.S.
would not only adhere to its founding principles and help to secure
freedom for others, but also protect its national security by
uprooting support for extremist ideologies that lead to global
terrorism.

[F.] Relations with Cuba is key to winning the war on

terror
US-Cuba Policy and Business Blog 10
("United States Cuba Relations - Terror Designation," January 5,
http://uscuba.blogspot.com/2010/01/unitedstates-cuba-relationsterrorist.html)
As long as we have poor relations with Cuba, we are efectively
opening the door to our adversaries. It is in the strategic interests of
our country to have normal relations with Cuba. As long as we
deprive Cuba of socioeconomic engagement, Cuba will seek it
elsewhere. Why do you think our adversaries are gaining a foothold
on our doorstep in the Western hemisphere? That Cuba has a
government we do not agree with or like how it treats its own
citizens, our embargo and preventing U.S. citizens from freely
visiting Cuba has not accomplished anything to change our island
neighbor. Keeping Cuba on this list is simply an obstacle and not any
real protection from our true enemy, Al Qaeda, and its weapon,
terrorism . That is who we are at war with, not Cuba.
ns in Havana.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

17
Cuba Af

[G.] Nuclear terrorist attack causes super power war

Robert Ayson, Professor of Strategic Studies and Director of the Centre for
Strategic Studies: New Zealand at the Victoria University of Wellington, 2010
(After a Terrorist Nuclear Attack: Envisaging Catalytic Efects, Studies in
Conflict & Terrorism, Volume 33, Issue 7, July, Available Online to Subscribing
Institutions via InformaWorld)
A terrorist nuclear attack, and even the use of nuclear weapons in response by the country attacked in the first place, would not necessarily
represent the worst of the nuclear worlds imaginable. Indeed, there are reasons to wonder whether nuclear terrorism should ever be regarded
as belonging in the category of truly existential threats. A contrast can be drawn here with the global catastrophe that would come from a
massive nuclear exchange between two or more of the sovereign states that possess these weapons in significant numbers. Even the worst
terrorism that the twenty-first century might bring would fade into insignificance alongside considerations of what a general nuclear war would

major nuclear weapons

states have hundreds and even thousands of nuclear weapons at
their disposal, there is always the possibility of a truly awful nuclear exchange taking place precipitated entirely by state
have wrought in the Cold War period. And it must be admitted that as long as the

possessors themselves. But these two nuclear worldsa non-state actor nuclear attack and a catastrophic interstate nuclear exchangeare

nuclear terrorism,
could precipitate a chain of events leading to a massive exchange of
nuclear weapons between two or more of the states that possess
them. In this context, todays and tomorrows terrorist groups might assume the place allotted during the early Cold War years to new
not necessarily separable. It is just possible that some sort of terrorist attack, and especially an act of

state possessors of small nuclear arsenals who were seen as raising the risks of a catalytic nuclear war between the superpowers started by
third parties. These risks were considered in the late 1950s and early 1960s as concerns grew about nuclear proliferation, the so-called n+1
problem. t may require a considerable amount of imagination to depict an especially plausible situation where an act of nuclear terrorism
could lead to such a massive inter-state nuclear war. For example, in the event of a terrorist nuclear attack on the United States, it might well
be wondered just how Russia and/or China could plausibly be brought into the picture, not least because they seem unlikely to be fingered as
the most obvious state sponsors or encouragers of terrorist groups. They would seem far too responsible to be involved in supporting that sort
of terrorist behavior that could just as easily threaten them as well. Some possibilities, however remote, do suggest themselves. For example,
how might the United States react if it was thought or discovered that the fissile material used in the act of nuclear terrorism had come from
Russian stocks,40 and if for some reason Moscow denied any responsibility for nuclear laxity? The correct attribution of that nuclear material
to a particular country might not be a case of science fiction given the observation by Michael May et al. that while the debris resulting from a
nuclear explosion would be spread over a wide area in tiny fragments, its radioactivity makes it detectable, identifiable and collectable, and a
wealth of information can be obtained from its analysis: the efficiency of the explosion, the materials used and, most important some

if the act of nuclear terrorism came as a

surprise, and American officials refused to believe that a terrorist group was fully
responsible (or responsible at all) suspicion would shift immediately to state
possessors. Ruling out Western ally countries like the United Kingdom and France, and probably Israel and India as well, authorities
in Washington would be left with a very short list consisting of North Korea , perhaps Iran if its program
continues, and possibly Pakistan. But at what stage would Russia and China be definitely ruled out
indication of where the nuclear material came from.41 Alternatively,

complete

in this high stakes game of nuclear Cluedo? In particular, if the act of nuclear terrorism occurred against a backdrop of existing tension in
Washingtons relations with Russia and/or China, and at a time when threats had already been traded between these major powers, would
officials and political leaders not be tempted to assume the worst? Of course, the chances of this occurring would only seem to increase if the
United States was already involved in some sort of limited armed conflict with Russia and/or China, or if they were confronting each other from

The reverse might well

apply too: should a nuclear terrorist attack occur in Russia or China
a distance in a proxy war, as unlikely as these developments may seem at the present time .

during a period of heightened tension or even limited conflict with the United States, could Moscow and
Beijing resist the pressures that might rise domestically to consider the United States as a possible

Washingtons early response to a terrorist nuclear

raise the possibility of an unwanted (and nuclear aided)
confrontation with Russia and/or China. For example, in the noise and
confusion during the immediate aftermath of the terrorist nuclear
attack, the U.S. president might be expected to place the countrys armed forces, including its nuclear arsenal, on a higher stage of
perpetrator or encourager of the attack?
attack on its own soil might also

alert. In such a tense environment, when careful planning runs up against the friction of reality, it is just possible that Moscow and/or China
might mistakenly read this as a sign of U.S. intentions to use force (and possibly nuclear force) against them. In that situation, the temptations
to preempt such actions might grow, although it must be admitted that any preemption would probably still meet with a devastating response .

[H.] Lashout will be widespread and cause extinction

Nicole Schwartz-Morgan, Assistant Professor of Politics and Economics at
Royal Military College of Canada, 10/10/2001, Wild Globalization and
Terrorism, http://www.wfs.org/mmmorgan.htm
The terrorist act can reactivate atavistic defense mechanisms which
drive us to gather around clan chieftans. Nationalistic sentiment reawakens, setting up an implacable frontier which divides "us" from

WFI 13
Pre Camp

18
Cuba Af

"them," each group solidifying its cohesion in a rising hate/fear of the other
group. (Remember Yugoslavia?) To be sure, the allies are trying for the
moment to avoid the language of polarization, insisting that "this is
not a war," that it is "not against Islam," "civilians will not be
targeted." But the word "war" was pronounced, a word heavy with
significance which forces the issue of partisanship. And it must be understood
that the sentiment of partisanship, of belonging to the group, is one of the
strongest of human emotions. Because the enemy has been named in
the media (Islam), the situation has become emotionally volatile .
Another spectacular attack, coming on top of an economic recession
could easily radicalize the latent attitudes of the United States, and
also of Europe, where racial prejudices are especially close to the surface
and ask no more than a pretext to burst out. This is the Sarajevo
syndrome: an isolated act of madness becomes the pretext for a war
that is just as mad, made of ancestral rancor, measureless
ambitions, and armies in search of a war. We should not be fooled by
our expressions of good will and charity toward the innocent victims of
this or other distant wars. It is our own comfortable circumstances
which permit us these benevolent sentiments. If conditions change so
that poverty and famine put the fear of starvation in our guts, the human
beast will reappear. And if epidemic becomes a clear and present
danger, fear will unleash hatred in the land of the free, flinging missiles
indiscriminately toward any supposed havens of the unseen enem y.
And on the other side, no matter how profoundly complex and
diferentiated Islamic nations and tribes may be, they will be forced to
behave as one clan by those who see advantage in radicalizing the
conflict, whether they be themselves merchants or terrorists.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

19
Cuba Af

1AC Advantage Oil Drilling

[A.] Deepwater drilling in Cuba makes oil spills likely, the
embargo makes spill management impossible
Bert and Clayton, 2012

[Captain Melissa Bert, USCG, 2011-2012 Military Fellow, U.S.Coast Guard, and
Blake Clayton, Fellow for Energy and National Security Council on Foreign
relations, March 2012, Addressing the Risk of a Cuban Oil Spill,
http://www.cfr.org/cuba/addressing-risk-cuban-oil-spill/p27515] /Wyo-MB
Deepwater drilling of the Cuban coast also poses a threat to the
United States. The exploratory well is seventy miles of the Florida coast
and lies at a depth of 5,800 feet. The failed Macondo well that triggered
the calamitous Deepwater Horizon oil spill in April 2010 had broadly
similar features, situated forty-eight miles from shore and approximately
five thousand feet below sea level. A spill of Florida's coast could
ravage the state's $57 billion per year tourism industry.
Washington cannot count on the technical know-how of Cuba's
unseasoned oil industry to address a spill on its own. Oil industry
experts doubt that it has a strong understanding of how to prevent
an ofshore oil spill or stem a deep-water well blowout. Moreover, the
site where the first wells will be drilled is a tough one for even
seasoned response teams to operate in. Unlike the calm Gulf of Mexico,
the surface currents in the area where Repsol will be drilling move at a brisk
three to four knots, which would bring oil from Cuba's ofshore wells to the
Florida coast within six to ten days. Skimming or burning the oil may not be
feasible in such fast-moving water. The most, and possibly only, efective
method to respond to a spill would be surface and subsurface dispersants. If
dispersants are not applied close to the source within four days after a spill,
uncontained oil cannot be dispersed, burnt, or skimmed, which would render
standard response technologies like containment booms inefective. Repsol
has been forthcoming in disclosing its spill response plans to U.S. authorities
and allowing them to inspect the drilling rig, but the Russian and Chinese
companies that are already negotiating with Cuba to lease acreage might not
be as cooperative. Had Repsol not volunteered to have the Cuba-bound
drilling rig examined by the U.S. Coast Guard and Bureau of Safety and
Environmental Enforcement to certify that it met international standards,
Washington would have had little legal recourse. The complexity of U.S.Cuba relations since the 1962 trade embargo complicates even
limited eforts to put in place a spill response plan. Under U.S. law
and with few exceptions, American companies cannot assist the
Cuban government or provide equipment to foreign companies
operating in Cuban territory.

[B.] Spills collapse the marine environment relations are

key
Pinon 10 (Jorge, Former president of Amoco Oil Latin America and Member
of the Brookings Cuba Task Force, "Deal needed to protect our seas," Miami

WFI 13
Pre Camp

20
Cuba Af

Herald, October 5, http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/10/05/1857743/dealneeded-to-protect-our-seas.html)

In a recent meeting with the Miami Herald's editorial board Rear Admiral William D. Baumgartner, the head

recognized the fact that Cuba and the

United States do not have an emergency response agreement for oil
spills. The catastrophic Deepwater Horizon incident has
demonstrated the challenge of managing oil spills along with their
complexity and magnitude. An oil spill in Cuba's waters could
threaten hundreds of miles of coastline and marine habitats in
Florida and the Bahamas. The urgency for an agreement on protocols of cooperation
between the U.S. and Cuba to respond quickly and efectively to any incident that threatens
either country's marine and coastal habitats becomes evident as Spanish oil company
of United States Coast Guard Seventh District,

Repsol moves closer in drilling the Jagey prospect in Cuba's Strait of Florida waters. The 1983 Convention
for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment in the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena
Convention) and the 1990 International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and
Cooperation, of which both Cuba and the United States are signatories, provides an umbrella under which

Closer relations with Cuba in

the environmental arena would help to emphasize the need for
contingency planning and cooperation in an efort to minimize the
damage from potential oil spills which respect no boundaries,
making joint cross-border programs critical.
both countries could develop such a bilateral agreement.

[C.] Oil spills destroy the marine biodiversity

Smith 10 (S.E., "How do Oil Spills Afect Marine Life," wiseGeek?,

December 7, http://www.wisegeek.com/how-do-oil-spills-afect-marinelife.htm)
One of the most direct ways in which oil spills afect marine life is by
essentially sufocating plants and animals. Marine plants can be
covered in a film of oil which prevents oxygen and water exchange,
causing the plants to die. Marine life which feed on this vegetation
will in turn struggle to survive. Coatings of oil on the flesh of birds
and mammals can literally kill them through sufocation . Oil spills also afect
marine life such as birds by stripping the water resistant coating from their feathers. A bird weighed down
by oil may have difficulty flying, and will develop hypothermia as a result of exposure to extremely cold
water. Mammals also sufer, as oil can remove water resistant compounds from the coats of furred marine

Oil spills afect marine life like filter feeders by

concentrating in the flesh of these animals. Clams, mussels, and
oysters may quickly accumulate toxins which can kill the animals or
be passed on along the food chain. Human consumers often complain that shellfish
life like otters and seals.

harvested from an area impact by an oil spill taste heavy and oily. Animals that rely on these filter feeders
for food may become sick and die as a result of consuming them. Wh en

oil spills afect

marine life, it usually happens at multiple levels of the food chain,
representing a lot of work to fix the problem. The inhalation and ingestion of

compounds related to oil spills can also harm marine life, both in the long and short term. In the long term,

oil spills afect marine life by interfering with the ability to breed,
reproduce, grow, or perform other vital functions. Toxins in oil can also cause
cancers and other illnesses in the long term . If left untreated, the area around an oil
spill can be denuded of life. Fortunately, there are ways to clean up oil spills. In addition to
chemicals, ecologists also use bacteria which thrive on the compounds in oil to digest it and render it less
harmful.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

21
Cuba Af

[D.] Marine biodiversity is key to ecosystem health and

global biodiversity
W.O.R., 2010
[World Ocean reveiew, 2010, Marine biodiversity a vital resource,
http://worldoceanreview.com/en/wor-1/marine-ecosystem/biodiversity/] /WyoMB
For a long time the significance of biological diversity in the worlds
oceans was unclear. It is now known to play a vital role in maintaining
the functionality and productivity of ecosystems. It also makes
habitats more resilient to environmental change. But the wellbalanced species communities are becoming increasingly unstable.
The rapid disappearance of species Biological diversity in the oceans has
decreased dramatically since industrialization began in the 19th century. The
primary causes for the losses include the destruction of habitats by trawler
fishing, pollution and eutrophication of the seas, as well as the steady
progress of climate change. Biological diversity is probably declining more
rapidly than ever before in the history of the Earth. But at the same time,
only a small fraction of the species in the deep sea and polar oceans
have so far been identified, making the loss of species in the oceans
much more difficult to record and evaluate than on land. Why is
marine biodiversity important? Every ecosystem performs certain
functions that are critically important for organisms. One of the most
important functions of marine ecosystems is the production of plant
biomass from sunlight and nutrients (primary productivity), which
represents the basic food source for all life in the ocean, and
ultimately also for humans. Around half of the worldwide primary
productivity is achieved by microscopically small plants, the phytoplankton,
which grow and divide in the ocean. Another function performed by
ecosystems is the creation of habitats, or structures, in coastal ecosystems.
For example, macroalgae, seagrass and corals form large undersea forests,
meadows or reefs that provide habitats for many other species such as
molluscs, crustaceans and fish. Kelp forests and seagrass meadows in the
Baltic Sea are vital habitats for the fry and juvenile fish that grow up here
before swimming into the open ocean as adults. Gastropods and small
crustaceans likewise feed on microalgae growing on the kelp or seagrass.
They thereby ensure that the structure-forming plants are not smothered,
and are allowed to grow that is their contribution to the ecosystem. The
molluscs and crustaceans that feed on microalgae are the basic food source
for larger predatory crustaceans and fish. Seagrass and kelp itself have
relatively long life spans because they are poor food sources for grazing
crustaceans and molluscs. They store nutrients in their biomass for a long
time, including nitrogen and phosphorous compounds transported by rivers
from agricultural areas to the sea. Seagrass and macroalgae thus function as
a kind of biological purification system in coastal ecosystems. Scientists
have addressed the question of whether the dramatic decline in
biological diversity has consequences for the stable functioning of
ecosystems. After 10 years of intensive study, the answer is clear
yes, it does. Experiments in coastal ecosystems, particularly seagrass
meadows and kelp forests, have shown that biological diversity in the
oceans is essential for maintaining the ecosystem functions

WFI 13
Pre Camp

22
Cuba Af

described above. Species diversity was decreased in various ways during

these experiments in order to compare the ecosystem functions of speciesrich with species-poor areas. In one field experiment, for example, the
number of seaweed species was artificially reduced by removing some at the
beginning of the growth period. The total algal biomass in this species-poor
area did, in fact, decrease, thereby resulting in a decline in the food for
consumers as well as the number of available habitats. In another
experiment, the number of grazing species that feed on the microalgae
growing on seagrass was reduced. It was found that the species-poor grazer
communities consumed fewer microalgae than species-rich communities. The
shortage of grazing species resulted in a slower growth of seagrass because
the increased growth of microalgae repressed photosynthesis in the
seagrass. These two experiments indicate that a decrease in biological
diversity has a negative impact on the structure of the habitat,
regardless of whether the number of species of producers (macroalgae) or
consumers (grazers) is reduced.

[E.] BIODIVERSITY LOSS RISKS EXTINCTION

Peter Montague, The Four HorsemenPart 2: Loss of Biodiversity, Rachels
Enviornment & Health News, December 14, 1995,
http://www.rachel.org/bulletin/bulletin.cfm?Issue_ID=651.
Extinctions are dangerous for humans, but it is not immediately clear just
how dangerous. In their 1984 book, EXTINCTION, Paul and Anne Ehrlich
compare our situation to an airplane held together by rivets. As time goes on,
an occasional rivet will pop out. No single rivet is essential for maintaining
flight, but eventually if we pop enough rivets, a crash seems certain to occur.
So it is with humans and the other species with whom we share the planet.
No single species is essential to our well being, yet it is certain that we need
biological diversity in order to survive. Therefore each time we diminish
diversity, we take another irreversible step toward the brink of a dark abyss.
In the process, we desecrate the wondrous works of the creator.

[F.] Relations prevent collapse of the marine environment

from oil spills
Pinon and Muse 10

(Jorge and Robert, Visiting Research Fellow in the Cuba Research Institute at
Florida International University and Attorney with substantial experience in
US-Cuba legal matters, "Coping with the Next Oil Spill: Why US-Cuba
Environmental Cooperation is Critical," The Brookings Institute, Cuba Issue
Briefing No. 2, May,
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2010/0518_oil_spill_cuba_p
inon/0518_oil_spill_cuba_pinon.pdf)
While the quest for deepwater drilling of oil and gas may slow as a
result of the latest calamity, it is un- likely to stop. it came as little surprise,
for example, that Repsol recently announced plans to move for- ward with exploratory oil drilling in Cuban

As Cuba continues to develop its deepwater

oil and natural gas reserves, the consequence to the United states of
a similar mishap occurring in Cuban waters moves from the
theoretical to the actual. The sober- ing fact that a Cuban spill could
foul hundreds of miles of American coastline and do profound harm
territo- rial waters later this year.1

WFI 13
Pre Camp

23
Cuba Af

to important marine habitats demands cooperative and proactive

planning by Washington and havana to minimize or avoid such a
calamity. Also important is the planning necessary to prevent and, if
necessary, respond to incidents arising from this countrys oil
industry that, through the action of currents and wind, threaten
Cuban waters and shorelines. While Washington is working to
prevent future di- sasters in U.s. waters like the Deepwater Horizon,
its current policies foreclose the ability to respond efectively to
future oil disasterswhether that disaster is caused by companies at work in Cuban waters, or
is the result of companies operating in U.s. waters. Context in April 2009, the Brookings institution released
a comprehensive report on United statesCuba rela- tions Cuba: a new Policy of Critical of Critical and
Constructive engagement timed to serve as a resource for policymakers in the new Administration. The
report, which reflected consensus among a diverse group of experts on U.s.-Cuba relations, was notable for
its menu of executive Branch actions that could, over time, facilitate the restoration of normal rela- tions
between the United states and Cuba through a series of confidence-building exercises in areas of clear
mutual interest. The emphasis was on identify- ing unobjectionable, practical and realizable areas of
cooperation between the two countries. Among the initiatives recommended to the new obama
Administration were: Open a dialogue between the United States and Cuba, particularly on issues of
mutual concern, including migration, counter-nar- cotics, environment, health, and security. Develop
agreements and assistance with the government of Cuba for disaster relief and en- vironmental
stewardship. Shortly after releasing its report, Brookings and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) cohosted a new era for U.S.-Cuba Relations on Marine and Coastal Resources Conservation, a conference
high- lighting the importance and value of environmental cooperation between Cuba and the United states.
EDF has particular expertise in this area because it has been working with Cuban scientists and environmental officials for over a decade to protect coral reefs, marine life and coastal areas in their country.
The joint Brookings/EDF conference identified areas of potential bilateral collaboration aimed at protecting shared marine and coastal ecosystems in the gulf of Mexico, Caribbean sea and the Atlantic ocean.

The importance of cooperation on environmental is- sues stressed at

the conference is particularly relevant now in light of events like the
Deepwater Horizon oil spill and the basic facts of geography and
their rela- tion to threats to contiguous U.s. and Cuban marine
areas. Cuba sits at the intersection of the Atlantic ocean, Caribbean
sea and gulf of Mexico and thus shares marine waters with the
United states, areas where oil and gas deposits are about to be
explored. Preserving that countrys marine biodiversity is critically important because it constitutes
the nat- ural heritage of the Cuban people. The health of Cubas ocean environment is likewise important
to the economies of coastal communities in the United states where significant numbers of fish species
that spawn in Cuban waters are carried by prevailing currents into U.s. waters and caught by commercial
and recreational fishermen. florida and the southeastern United states are situated in the downstream of
those currents, which bring snapper, grouper, tuna, swordfish (as well as manatee and sea turtles) to U.S.
waters, but can serve equally as vec- tors of Cuban spilled oil. The United states geological survey
estimates that Cubas Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ), which includes the gulf of Mexico north Cuba fold
and Thrust Belt, has over five billion barrels of oil and 8.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas undiscovered
reserves.2 Like the United states, the size of Cubas oil and gas reserves is both economically fortuitous
and a measure of the threat it poses to the marine environment in addition to spains Repsol, over the next
few years international oil companies such as norways statoil-hydro, Brazils Petrobras and others will be
conducting exploratory work of Cubas north coast. it is only a matter of time before production begins in

To respond efectively to an oilrelated marine acci- dent, any company operating in or near Cuban
ter- ritorial waters will require immediate access to the expertise
and equipment of U.s. oil companies and their suppliers. They are
best positioned to provide immediately the technology and knowhow needed to halt and limit the damage to the marine environment. obviously, the establishment of working relations between
the United states and Cuba to fa- cilitate marine environmental
protection is the first step in the contingency planning and
cooperation that will be necessary to an efective response and early
end to an oil spill.
earnest and the environmental risks rise exponentially.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

24
Cuba Af

[G.] Lifting embargo k2 US regulations on Cuban drilling

Harder, 2011

[Amy, National Journal Daily P.M. UpdateWashington: Atlantic Media, Inc. (Oct
18, 2011), As Cuba Prepares to Drill, Embargo Complicates Matters for U.S,
Accessed online via Proquest] /Wyo-MB
The half-century-old U.S. embargo on Cuba makes it uniquely
difficult for the federal government to prepare for an oil spill of
Cuba's coast that could easily afect U.S. waters, lawmakers were
warned at a Senate hearing on Tuesday. Because of the embargo, U.S.
companies cannot supply Cuba with equipment or have any say in its
safety regulations. Drilling in Cuban waters, set to begin as early as
this year, could occur within 70 miles of the Florida Keys. "We don't
know a lot about the Cuban oversight regime," said Michael Bromwich,
who directs the Interior Department's Bureau of Safety and Environmental
Enforcement, after the hearing. "The information that we have received
suggests it is not highly developed." The Senate Energy and Natural
Resources Committee held the hearing to discuss plans by Spanish company
Repsol to begin drilling of Cuba's coast as soon as this year. The Cold Warera embargo, in place for 49 years, would preclude U.S. companies
even from helping Cuba control a blowout or spill. And if there were
an oil spill caused by Cuban drilling, the U.S. Coast Guard would
have to seek approval from the State Department to respond. The
Treasury Department also would have to approve U.S. government
involvement in a Cuban oil spill clean-up efort, since it imposes the
sanctions. "Are we able to respond?" Committee Chairman Jef Bingaman, DN.M., asked Vice Adm. Brian Salerno, deputy commandant for operations with
the U.S. Coast Guard. "We do not have immediate authority to respond
to a foreign source" spill, Salerno responded, noting that Cuba is a
"special case" because of the embargo. During the hearing, Sen. Joe
Manchin, D-W.Va., grilled Salerno and Bromwich about whether anyone from
the administration is in talks to modify or lift the embargo in order to make
working with Cuba on its ofshore drilling regime more efective. "I'm not
aware of any eforts," Bromwich responded. Salerno agreed. "So we're at
the mercy of the Cuban government to make sure they do it right?"
Manchin asked. "They have oversight power," Bromwich said. "We don't." In
prepared testimony, Bromwich underscored that Repsol, the Spanish
company preparing to drill of Cuba's northern coast, has since February
voluntarily provided the U.S. government with information about its drilling
plans and oil spill response.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

25
Cuba Af

1AC Advantage Hemispheric Relations

[A.] The time is right to lift the Cuban Embargoreforms
beginning in Cuba now
Tisdall, 2013

[Simon, assistant editor and foreign afairs columnist of the Guardian. He was
previously foreign editor of the Guardian and the Observer and served as
White House corespondent and U.S. editor in Washington D.C., Time for U.S.
and Cuba to kiss and make up, 4-8-13,
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/08/opinion/opinion-simon-tisdall-cuba] /Wyo-MB
These blinkered conservatives need to get over themselves. The 60-year
stand-of between the U.S. and Cuba is absurd. It is
counterproductive and harmful to both countries. It is time to end
this Cold War anachronism, kiss and make up. Anger over Beyonc's
supposed breach of the U.S. embargo rules restricting American citizens'
travel to Cuba is symbolic of a deeper fear among right-wingers. Two key
factors have changed since the days -- not so long ago -- when Washington
seemed to be regularly threatening the Castro government with Iraq-style
overthrow. One is that George W. Bush has been replaced by a
Democrat. As Barack Obama enters his second and final term, immune to
electoral imperatives, conservatives worry he may use his freedom of action
to efect an historic rapprochement with Cuba. American liberals certainly
believe he should do so. The second change is in Cuba itself, where the
government, now led by Fidel Castro's brother, Raoul, has embarked
on a cautious program of reform. The government -- dubbed the world's
longest-running dictatorship by the American right -- has even set a date
for its own dissolution. Doing what "dictators" rarely do, Raoul
Castro announced in February that in 2018, he would hand over
power and that any successor would be subject to term limits. The
Castro brothers have reportedly chosen a career communist, first vice
president Miguel Diaz-Canel, to succeed them. But in reality, once their grip
on power is relaxed, anything may happen. The two Florida Republicans
who have been making a fuss about the Beyonce visit are Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
and Mario Diaz-Balart. They are veterans, and beneficiaries, of the anti-Castro
campaign that has long been waged from Little Havana, in Miami, the home
to the state's large Cuban exile population. The Cuban vote, as it is known,
has traditionally gone to Republicans. But Obama's approach is the antithesis
of the politics of hate and division. He broke that mold last year, making big
gains among the Cuban American electorate. This result suggested the
polarized ethnically-based politics of the past may be breaking down, said
Julia Sweig of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations in a recent article in The
National Interest. "Having won nearly half of the Cuban American vote in
Florida in 2012, a gain of 15 percentage points over 2008, Obama can move
quickly on Cuba. If he were to do so, he would find a cautious but willing
partner in Ral Castro, who needs rapprochement with Washington to
advance his own reform agenda," Sweig said. Little wonder Republicans like
Ros-Lehtinen are worried. If things go on like this, they could lose a large
piece of their political raison d'etre. There are other reasons for
believing the time is right for Obama to end the Cuba stalemate. The

WFI 13
Pre Camp

26
Cuba Af

recent death of Hugo Chavez, Venezuela's influential president, has

robbed Havana of a strong supporter, both political and financial.
Chavez was not interested in a rapprochement with the U.S., either
by Cuba or Venezuela. His revolutionary beliefs did not allow for an
accommodation with the American "imperialists." His successors
may not take so militant a line, especially given that Venezuela
continues to trade heavily with the U.S., a privilege not allowed
Cuba. The so-called "pink tide" that has brought several left-wing
leaders to power in Latin America in the past decade is not exactly
on the ebb, but the hostility countries such as Brazil, Ecuador and
Bolivia felt towards the Bush administration has abated. In fact,
according to Sweig's article, U.S. business with Latin America as a whole is
booming, up 20% in 2011. The U.S. imports more crude oil from Venezuela
and Mexico than from the Persian Gulf, including Saudi Arabia. The U.S.
does three times more business with Latin America than with China.
The stand-of over Cuba is an obstacle to advancing U.S. interests
and business in Latin American countries, and vice versa. The
continuation of the embargo has left the U.S. almost totally isolated
at the United Nations, and at sharp odds with its major allies,
including Britain and the EU. But more importantly, the continued
ostracism of Cuba's people -- for they, not the Havana government, are
the biggest losers -- is unfair, unkind and unnecessary. If the U.S.
wants full democracy in Cuba, then it should open up fully to
ordinary Cubans. Tear down the artificial walls that separate the
people of the two countries and, as Mao Zedong once said, let a
hundred flowers bloom.

[B.] Cuba is a low-hanging fruit its a prerequisite to

hemispheric relations
Doherty 8 (Patrick, "An Obama Policy for Cuba," McClathy Newspapers,
December
12,cuba.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2008/obama_policy_cuba_9301
)
With his national security team in place, President-elect Barack Obama's foreign

policy principals will be immediately struck by how many complex and expensive challenges they will face.
Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Israel-Palestine and Russia, will all require enormous energy, all the tools

None of
these crises will allow President Obama to signal swiftly to the world
the kind of changes he proposes in American foreign policy. In
contrast, U.S.-Cuba policy is low-hanging fruit: though of marginal importance
in our foreign policy toolbox, and will all take years to resolve, if they can be resolved.

domestically, it could be changed immediately at little cost. At

present, that policy is a

major black spot on America's international reputation . For the rest

of the world, our failed, obsolete and 50-year old policy toward Cuba
goes against everything that Obama campaigned for, and the recent
185-3 U.N. vote to condemn the centerpiece of that policy , the embargo
the 16th such vote in as many years

makes that clear. The entire world believes

our policy is wrong . And the world is right. The fact is that since Cuba stopped exporting
revolution and started exporting doctors and nurses, it ceased being a national security concern for the

WFI 13
Pre Camp

27
Cuba Af

United States. And yet we restrict travel to the island - unconstitutionally - and constrain Cuban-Americans
in the amount of money they can send to their families on the island. Moreover, the economic embargo

our Helms-Burton legislation

imposes Washington's will on foreign businesses who wish to trade
with Cuba, creating ill will in business communities from Canada to
Brazil. Our Cuba policy is also an obstacle to striking a new
relationship with the nations of Latin America. Any 21st-century policy
toward Latin America will have to shift from the Cold War-era emphasis on right-wing
governments and top-down economic adjustment to creating a hemispheric
partnership to address many critical issues: the revival of militant
leftism, the twin challenges of sustainability and inclusive economic
growth, and the rising hemispheric influence of Russia and China.
But until Washington ends the extraordinary sanctions that comprise
the Cuba embargo, Latin America will remain at arms-length, and
the problems in our backyard - Hugo Chavez, drugs, immigration,
energy insecurity - will simply fester.
hurts the Cuban people more than the Cuban leadership, and

[C.] Lifting embargo solves US image and leadership in

Latin America
Fesler, 2009
[Lily, Research Associate The council on hemispheric relations, Cuban Oil:
Havana's Potential Geo-Political Bombshell, Washington Report on the
Hemisphere29. 11. (Jun 18, 2009), Accessed online via Proquest] Wyo-MB
In 1962, the proclamation initiating the embargo stated its purpose was to
"promote national and hemispheric security by isolating the present
Government of Cuba and thereby reducing the threat posed by its alignment
with the Communist powers." With the end of the Cold War, the need to
protect the U.S. from communism disappeared along with the
rationale for the Cuban embargo. The U.S. enthusiastically trades
with communist nations like China and Vietnam, so punishing Cuba
for its form of government is clearly no longer a valid justification. It
also has been argued that the embargo has helped the Castros stay in
power, rather than inhibiting them. The Castros have turned the
"blockade" into the scapegoat for all of Cuba's economic woes. This
theory may not be entirely fair, especially as the U.S. is cur- ently Cuba's largest food exporter due to a loophole in the embargo. In 2000, Presi- dent Bill
Clinton signed a waiver allowing food and agricultural prod- ucts to be sold to
Cuba on humani- tarian grounds, although much of what is sent is far from
being hu- manitarian and is loaded with inhib- iting red tape. The waiver
includes goods like beer, soda, drink mixes, beauty products and kitchen
cabinets, as well as staples like corn, poultry and wheat. The U.S. now earns
upwards of $700 million annually from the Cuba trade. Some critics have
argued that the best way to expose the inadequacies of Castro rule
would be to lift the embargo, and thus respond to Havana's claim
that the U.S. is the cause of much of Cuban privation. Further Steps
President Obama may have hoped that his recent overtures towards Cuba
would temporarily satisfy his critics, but instead they have merely amplified
calls for Washington to take more forthright steps. Ending restrictions on
Cuban-American travel was done in a discriminatory fashion. In a democratic
country, every American, irrespective of their background, should be able to

WFI 13
Pre Camp

28
Cuba Af

travel wherever their neighbors travel; nationality or family relationships

should not aford certain Americans special privileges, or the lack of them.
The lifting of restrictions on remittances was a step in the right direction, but
it has yet to significantly afect Cuban finances. In fact, remittances to Cuba
have not increased since they were lifted two months ago, according to the
president of Cimex. Constructive Engagement A rising tide of US public
opinion is calling on Washington to lift the outdated and
malfunctioning embargo on Cuba, a move that would not only
benefit the beleaguered Cuban population and be of some value to
the oil-needy United States, but also improve the tarnished image of
the U.S. in Latin America. Right now, the House of Representatives is
considering the "United States- Cub a Trade Normalization Act of 2009",
which recognizes that "Cuba is no longer a threat," the embargo is "not
fulfilling its purpose for which it was established," and that "trade
and commerce" are the best routes to democracy and human rights.
This bill would lift the trade embargo and allow all Americans to travel to
Cuba, both much needed changes. Representative William Delahunt, who is
sponsoring the bill, has said he doesn't expect a vote until November.
Nevertheless, its prospects for passing are high. Recently, Hillary Clinton
stated, "We have to recognize that our country is not perfect either,
that some of the difficulties that we had historically in forging strong
and lasting relationships in our hemisphere are a result of us
perhaps not listening, perhaps not paying enough attention." The
U.S. now has the chance to reject its historically arrogant operating
style in the region, and disprove Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega's
recent claim that, when it comes to U.S. policy, "the president has
changed, but not Latin American policy." Congress should prioritize
pushing the Trade Normalization Act through the House and the Senate to
pave the way for some advancements in the U.S. and Cuban
economies, and to improve Washington's still lagging image in Latin
America.

[D.] The plan solves leadership in Latin America, the

Cuban embargo is the key stumbling block to boosting
relations
White, 2013

[Robert, International Herald Tribune, A chance to remake U.S.-Cuba relations,

3-9-13, Lexis] /Wyo-MB
An end to the Cuba embargo would send a powerful signal to all of
Latin America that the United States wants a new, warmer
relationship with democratic forces seeking social change
throughout the Americas. I joined the State Department as a Foreign Service officer in the
1950s and chose to serve in Latin America in the 1960s. I was inspired by President John F. Kennedy's
creative response to the revolutionary fervor then sweeping Latin America. The 1959 Cuban revolution, led
by the charismatic Fidel Castro, had inspired revolts against the cruel dictatorships and corrupt
pseudodemocracies that had dominated the region since the end of Spanish and Portuguese rule in the
19th century. Kennedy had a charisma of his own, and it captured the imaginations of leaders who wanted
democratic change, not violent revolution. Kennedy reacted to the threat of continental insurrection by
creating the Alliance for Progress, a kind of Marshall Plan for the hemisphere that was calculated to
achieve the same kind of results that saved Western Europe from communism. He pledged billions of
dollars to this efort. In hindsight, it may have been overly ambitious, even nave, but Kennedy's focus on
Latin America rekindled the promise of the Good Neighbor Policy of Franklin D. Roosevelt and transformed
the whole concept of inter-American relations. Tragically, after Kennedy's assassination in 1963, the ideal

WFI 13
Pre Camp

29
Cuba Af

of the Alliance for Progress crumbled and ''la noche mas larga'' - ''the longest night'' - began for the
proponents of Latin American democracy. Military regimes flourished, democratic governments withered,
moderate political and civil leaders were labeled Communists, rights of free speech and assembly were
curtailed and human dignity crushed, largely because the United States abandoned all standards save that
of anti-communism. During my Foreign Service career, I did what I could to oppose policies that supported
dictators and closed of democratic alternatives. In 1981, as the ambassador to El Salvador, I refused a
demand by the secretary of state, Alexander M. Haig Jr., that I use official channels to cover up the
Salvadoran military's responsibility for the murders of four American churchwomen. I was fired and forced
out of the Foreign Service. The Reagan administration, under the illusion that Cuba was the power driving
the Salvadoran revolution, turned its policy over to the Pentagon and C.I.A., with predictable results. During
the 1980s the United States helped expand the Salvadoran military, which was dominated by uniformed
assassins. We Americans armed them, trained them and covered up their crimes. After our
counterrevolutionary eforts failed to end the Salvadoran conflict, the Defense Department asked its
research institute, the RAND Corporation, what had gone wrong. RAND analysts found that U.S. policy
makers had refused to accept the obvious truth that the insurgents were rebelling against social injustice
and state terror. As a result, ''we pursued a policy unsettling to ourselves, for ends humiliating to the
Salvadorans and at a cost disproportionate to any conventional conception of the national interest.'' Over
the subsequent quarter-century, a series of profound political, social and economic changes have
undermined the traditional power bases in Latin America and, with them, longstanding regional institutions
like the Organization of American States. The organization, which is headquartered in Washington and
which excluded Cuba in 1962, was seen as irrelevant by Chvez. He promoted the creation of the
Community of Latin American and Caribbean States - which excludes the United States and Canada - as an
alternative. At a regional meeting that included Cuba and excluded the United States, Chvez said that
''the most positive thing for the independence of our continent is that we meet alone without the
hegemony of empire.'' Chvez was masterful at manipulating America's antagonism toward Fidel Castro
as a rhetorical stick with which to attack the United States as an imperialist aggressor, an enemy of
progressive change, interested mainly in treating Latin America as a vassal continent, a source of cheap
commodities and labor. Like its predecessors, the Obama administration has given few signs that it has

After President
Obama took office in 2009, Latin America's leading statesman at the
time, Luiz Incio Lula da Silva, then the president of Brazil, urged
Obama to normalize relations with Cuba. Lula, as he is universally
known, correctly identified our Cuba policy as the chief stumbling
block to renewed ties with Latin America, as it had been since the
very early years of the Castro regime. After the failure of the 1961 Bay of Pigs
grasped the magnitude of these changes or cares about their consequences.

invasion, Washington set out to accomplish by stealth and economic strangulation what it had failed to do
by frontal attack. But the clumsy mix of covert action and porous boycott succeeded primarily in bringing
shame on the United States and turning Castro into a folk hero. And even now, despite the relaxing of
travel restrictions and Ral Castro's announcement that he will retire in 2018, the implacable hatred of
many within the Cuban exile community continues. The fact that two of the three Cuban-American
members of the Senate - Marco Rubio of Florida and Ted Cruz of Texas - are rising stars in the Republican
Party complicates further the potential for a recalibration of Cuban-American relations. (The third member,
Senator Robert Menendez, Democrat of New Jersey, is the new chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, but his power has been weakened by a continuing ethics controversy.) Are there any other
examples in the history of diplomacy where the leaders of a small, weak nation can prevent a great power

The re-election of President

Obama, and the death of Chvez, give America a chance to reassess
the irrational hold on our imaginations that Fidel Castro has exerted
for five decades. The president and his new secretary of state, John
Kerry, should quietly reach out to Latin American leaders like President
from acting in its own best interest merely by staying alive?

Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia and Jos Miguel Insulza, secretary general of the Organization of American

The message should be simple: The president is prepared to

show some flexibility on Cuba and asks your help. Such a simple
request could transform the Cuban issue from a bilateral problem
into a multilateral challenge. It would then be up to Latin Americans
to devise a policy that would help Cuba achieve a sufficient measure
of democratic change to justify its reintegration into a hemisphere
composed entirely of elected governments. If, however, our present
policy paralysis continues, we will soon see the emergence of two
rival camps, the United States versus Latin America. While
Washington would continue to enjoy friendly relations with
States.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

30
Cuba Af

individual countries like Brazil, Mexico and Colombia, the vision of

Roosevelt and Kennedy of a hemisphere of partners cooperating in
matters of common concern would be reduced to a historical
footnote.

[E.] Hemispheric relations is key to solving organized

crime
Brookings 8 (The Brookings Institution. November. Rethinking. U.S.Latin
American Relations: A Hemispheric Partnership for a Turbulent World
http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/1124_latin_america_partnership.aspx)

Crime and insecurity are growing scourges in the Western Hemisphere. The LAC region has only 9 percent
of the worlds population, yet it has 27 percent of global homicidesabout 140,000 a year. Crime,
especially organized crime, poses a serious threat to public security and undermines public institutions and

Organized crime in the hemisphere today

encompasses a variety of criminal enterprises, including narcotics
trafficking, money laundering, alien smuggling, human trafficking,
kidnapping, and arms and counterfeit goods smuggling. The United
States stands at the crossroads of many of these illicit flows. Violent
the legitimate business sector.

youth gangs, such as the Mara Salvatrucha, have a presence in the United States. Some 2,000 guns cross
the United StatesMexico border from north to south every day, helping to fuel violence among drug
cartels and with the army and police. About 17,500 persons are smuggled into the United States annually
as trafficking victims, and another 500,000 come as illegal immigrants. The United States remains both a
leading consuming country across the full range of illicit narcotics and a country with major domestic

The nations of the

Western Hemisphere have adopted a variety of international
instruments to tackle organized crime. Virtually every country in the Americas has
ratified the 2000 UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. Most of the
hemispheres countries have also signed and ratified international
agreements that deal with the trafficking of persons, the smuggling
of migrants, illicit firearms trafficking, and the illicit drug trade. Yet
a significant reduction in crime in the hemisphere remains elusive.
The narcotics trade remains at the core of organized crime in the
hemisphere. This is by far the most lucrative of illegal trades,
generating hundreds of billions of dollars a year. Its immense cash
flow, vast employment opportunities, and sophisticated networks
feed other kinds of criminal activity and allow drug traffickers to
adapt with extraordinary speed to governments counternarcotics
eforts. The drug trade is also singularly adept at corrupting judicial, political, and law enforcement
production of methamphetamines, cannabis, and other synthetic narcotics.

institutions. In Mexico, open war between the cartels and all levels of government has killed 4,000 people
so far in 2008 aloneabout as many casualties as the United States has sustained in almost six years of
war in Iraq. This violence already threatens to spill into the United States and to destabilize Mexicos
political institutions. Because it lies at the core of regional criminal activity, this section focuses on the

A hemisphere-wide counternarcotics strategy

encompassing consuming, producing, and transshipment countries
is required to combat not only the illegal drug trade but also other
forms of crime.
illegal drug trade.

[F.] Were at the tipping point stopping Latin American

drug trade is key to cutting of Global supply chains
Baker 8 (Roger, "The Big Business of Organized Crime in Mexico," Stratfor,
February
13,http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/big_business_organized_crime_mexico)

WFI 13
Pre Camp

31
Cuba Af

This is a fundamental aspect of the phenomenon we are seeing now. It is a classic case of organized crime.

The Mexican drug cartels are, for the most part, organized crime groups.

What distinguishes Mexican organized crime groups and others from revolutionaries, terrorists and hybrid
organizations such as the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) is the underlying principle of

In the global system, there is an economy of crime. It currently

but any item that is illegal in one place and legal in
other and has an artificially inflated price quickly can become the
center of the system. Human trafficking, smuggling and counterfeiting are cases in point, as
making money.

is built around drugs,

was alcohol during prohibition. Products move from where they are legal (or at least not well-controlled) to
where they are in demand but illegal. The money, of course, moves in the opposite direction. That money
eventually ends up in the normal banking system. Organized crime wants to make money and it might
want to manipulate the system, but it does not seek to overthrow the system or transform society.
Insurgencies and revolutions seek to transform. In the end, organized crime is about making money.
Endemic organized crime leads to corruption and collusion, and in the long term often burns itself out as
the money earned through its activities eventually moves into the legal economic system. When organized
crime groups become rich enough, they move their money into legitimate businesses in order to launder it
or a least use it, eventually turning it into established money that has entered the realm of business. This
can get more complicated when organized crime and insurgents/guerrillas overlap, as is the case with
FARC. The problems we are seeing in Mexico are similar to those we have seen in past cases, in which
criminal elements become factionalized. In Mexico, these factions are fighting over control of drug routes
and domain. The battles that are taking place are largely the result of fighting among the organized crime
groups, rather than cartels fighting the Mexican government. In some ways, the Mexican military and
security forces are a third party in this not the focus. Ultimately, the cartels not the government

As new groups emerge and

evolve, they frequently can be quite violent and in some sense
anarchic. When a new group of drug dealers moves into a neighborhood, it might be flamboyant and
excessively violent. It is the same on a much larger scale with these
organized crime cartels. However, although cartel infighting is tolerated to some extent, the
control the level of violence and security in the country.

government is forced to react when the level of violence starts to get out of hand. This is what we are
seeing in Mexico. However, given that

organized crime tends to become more

conservative as it grows and becomes more established, the

situation in Mexico could be reaching a tipping point.

For example, during

the summer of 2007, the Gulf and Sinaloa cartels declared a temporary truce as their rivalry began to

As the competition among the cartels settles,

they could begin to draw back their forces and deal with those
members who are excessively violent or out of control. This is simply
a way of assuring their operations. The American Mafia followed a similar pattern,
impact their business operations.

evolving into an organism with strong discipline and control. There is a question now as to whether the
Mexican cartels are following the American model or imitating the Colombian model, which is a hybrid of
organized crime and an insurgency. In fact, they might be following both. Mexico, in some sense, is two
countries. The North has a much higher standard of living than the rest of the country, especially the area
south of Mexico City. In the North, we could ultimately see a move in the direction of the American Mafia,
whereas in the South the home of the domestic guerrilla groups Zapatista National Liberation Army and
Popular Revolutionary Army it could shift more toward the Colombian model. While the situation is
evolving, the main battle in Mexico continues to be waged among various cartel factions, rather than
among the cartels and the Mexican government or security forces. The goal of organized crime, and the
goal of many of these cartels, is to get rich within the system, with minor variations on how that is
achieved. A revolutionary group, on the other hand, wants to overthrow and change the system. The
cartels obviously are working outside the legal framework, but they are not putting forward an alternative
nor do they seem to want to. Rather, they can achieve their goals simply through payofs and other
forms of corruption. The most likely outcome is not a merger between the cartels and the guerrilla groups,
or even a shift in the cartels priorities to include government overthrow. However, as the government
turns up the pressure, the concern is that the cartels will adopt insurgent-style tactics.

Organized

crime is not street crime; it is systemic geopolitical crime. It is a

significant social force, bringing huge amounts of capital into a
system. This flow of money can reshape the society. But this
criminal supply chain runs parallel to, and in many cases intersects,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

32
Cuba Af

the legitimate global supply chain. Whether through smuggling and

money laundering or increased investment capital and higher
consumption rates, the underground and aboveground economies
intersect. U.S. and Mexican counternarcotics operations have an
instant impact on the supply chain.

Such operations shift traffic patterns across the

border, afect the level of stability in the border areas where there is a significant amount of
manufacturing and trade and impact sensitive social and political issues between the two countries,
particularly immigration. In this light, then, violence is only one small part of the total impact that cartel
activities and government counternarcotics eforts are having on the border.

[G.] Organized crime makes nuclear and CBW warfare

inevitable outweighs the risk of state-state warfare
CSIS 9 (CEnter for Strategic and International Studies, "Revolution 6 Conflict," Global Strategy Institute," gsi.csis.org/index.php?
Itemid=59&id=30&option=com_content&task=view)

The shift from interstate to intrastate war and the increasing capacity of non-state actors to commit acts of

megaviolence reflect how patterns of conflict have changed since

the end of the Cold War. Today warfare is increasingly described as asymmetric.
Traditional military powers, like the United States, are confronted by
increasingly atypical adversaries non-state ideologues, transnational criminal
syndicates, and rogue states that employ unconventional tactics in wars
ambiguous in both place and time. Today, conflict is more likely to
occur between warring factions on residential streets than between
armies on battlefields. As before, many belligerents still fight for power and/or wealth, but an
increasing number are fighting purely for ideology. Acts of terrorism have become the
major vehicle for their malcontent, especially for well-organized and
well-funded Islamic groups like al-Qaeda. The attacks of September 11, 2001 and
similar incidences in recent decades have shown that even small groups of terrorists can carry out

The proliferation of nuclear

and biological technologies only ups the ante for future incidences.
[19] Terrorism and Transnational Crime Over the past few decades the size and scope of terrorists abilities
have become truly alarming. Terrorist organizations have evolved from
scrappy bands of dissidents into well-organized groups with vast
human and capital resources. This situation is forcing governments around the world to
sophisticated attacks that result in an incredible loss of life.

develop strategies to both neutralize these groups where they operate and maintain security at home. The
United States has met some success in combating terrorist organizations, killing high-level officials and
isolating certain sub-groups, but the War on Terror has had the unintended consequence of forming microactors, individuals driven by foreign military operations to militant extremism. These individuals, or
groups of individuals, operate in poorly organized cells and as such use internet technologies to spread
their message and share plans of attack. Perhaps paradoxically, this disorganization and decentralization
makes these groups a greater threat to the military as it is harder to detect and track them. [1]

Terrorism has also had the efect of heightening tensions between

sovereign nations. After the Mumbai terrorist attacks of 2008, India and Pakistan
neared war after India accused Pakistan of harboring terrorists and
Pakistan refused to turn over individuals for prosecution. To finance
their illegal activity, terrorist organizations are becoming involved
in transnational crime, especially drug trafficking . Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld,
Director of the American Center for Democracy, has stated, The huge revenues from the
heroin trade fill the cofers of the terrorists and thwart any attempt
to stabilize the region. [2] Over the last two decades, we have witnessed a
surge in transnational crime, in large part because of the dissolution

WFI 13
Pre Camp

33
Cuba Af

of Cold War alliances that helped keep criminal syndicates in check.

Organized crime activity is not limited to the smuggling of illicit drugs, but includes the trafficking of arms,
drugs, and human beings. Weapons of Mass Destruction According to President Obama, In a strange turn

the risk of a nuclear attack

has gone up. [3] International mechanisms established in recent
decades have by and large kept the nuclear ambitions of
superpowers at bay. However, the fall of the Soviet Union and the
increasing prevalence and power of criminal networks have made it
more likely that a single actor could get his or her hands on a
Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD). The term WMD is used to
describe any weapons technology (radiological, chemical, biological,
or nuclear) that is capable of killing a large number of people. [4] By and large it is believed that
of history, the threat of global nuclear war has gone down, but

WMD pose the greatest threat in the possession of belligerent states like Iraq, North Korea, and Iran.

experts are warning that a more urgent threat would come

from WMD in the hands of non-state actors. Nuclear material and
technical knowledge are frequently exchanged on the black market,
especially in post-Soviet countries, where security personnel charged with
guarding nuclear facilities are easily bribed into selling nuclear plans
and materials. [5] With the help of the United States, Russia and its neighbors have made strides in
However,

securing these sites and improving oversight of the nuclear industry, but there is no telling how much

The WMD threat does not only come

from groups operating in the developing world, however, as recent
biochemical attacks attest. The prime suspect in the anthrax attacks
of 2001 was a government scientist, and the sarin gas attack on the
Tokyo subway was committed by a religious organization that
enjoyed official government recognition. The ease with which these
materials have become available, especially through online
resources, is forcing governments to restrict their use. International
material has been traded over the years. [6]

governing bodies will need to find an acceptable paradigm that allows for the benign applications of these
technologies, as in power generation, while deterring the nefarious ones.

[H.] Organized crime in Latin America causes regional

instability
Bagley 1 (Bruce, GLOBALIZATION AND TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED
CRIME: THE RUSSIAN MAFIA IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN, School
of International Studies at the University of Miami Coral Gables, November
15, http://www.as.miami.edu/international-studies/pdf/Bagley
%20GLOBALIZATION%202.pdf)
The dangers and risks to Lain American governments and societies that emanate from expanding Russian
mafiya activities within and outside their national borders are usually more indirect than direct, although

Russian mafia armsfor-cocaine smuggling operations have unquestionably upgraded the

FARC guerrillas arsenal and enhanced their firepower vis a vis the
Colombian police and armed forces, thereby contributing to the
intensification of the countrys internal conflicts . The fact that the Russian mafia
nonetheless real because of their obliqueness. In Colombia, for example,

appears equally willing to sell arms to Colombias rightwing paramilitaries may underscore their lack of
ideological involvement in Colombias decades-old civil strife ,

but it in no way mitigates

the profoundly negative consequences that their illicit activities hold
for Colombian political stability and state security . The Russians international
money laundering services are provided in a similarly non-partisan fashion -- for a price, they will launder

In doing so, of
course, they facilitate the clandestine movement of the narco-dollars
that help underwrite the on-going violence in Colombia.[83 ] Even for
drug trafficker, guerrilla or paramilitary money on an equal opportunity basis.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

34
Cuba Af

Russian
illegal arms trafficking and arms-for-drugs deals in alliance with local
criminal gangs significantly increase the firepower available to
violent elements of society and make them more difficult and
dangerous for law enforcement to control. Brazils favelas, for instance,
have become virtual war zones, at least in part as a result of Russian drug and arms
trafficking links with local criminal organizations in that country. Likewise, the Central American
maras have become progressively better armed and threatening
to social stability and state security throughout the Isthmus as a
result of their linkages with Russian (along with Mexican, Colombian and North
American) transnational organized crime groups. The Russian mafia is not, by any
those Latin American countries not engulfed in civil wars such as the one raging in Colombia,

means, the only source of weapons in the region. The United States itself is a major purveyor of small arms
throughout Latin America and the Caribbean and elsewhere in the world.[84] But given the political chaos
and relative availability of black-market arms in Russia and most other former Soviet Bloc countries,

Russian crime groups enjoy significant comparative advantages in

this clandestine market and, thus, have emerged as major players in
the international illicit arms trade.[85] The consequences for Latin
America and the Caribbean are visible on a daily basis in the surging
rates of gang warfare and violent crime registered in every major
urban area in the region. Independent of the arms black-market, the Russian
mafias criminal strategies and tactics for penetration into the
region are inherently, even if indirectly, threatening to institutional
stability and state security. Russian crime groups do not normally seek to displace the local
criminal organizations ensconced in each Latin American or Caribbean country, but rather to cooperate

with them in order to facilitate their own illegal operations and to elude detection and arrest. In doing so ,

they clearly strengthen the local crime groups with which they
affiliate by providing them with expanded markets in Europe and
Russia for contraband such as cocaine, heroin and
methamphetamines, by sharing new smuggling routes into (and
networks of protection and distribution in) these lucrative markets, and by helping
to launder the profits derived from their illicit enterprises through
Russian channels at home and abroad. The Russian mafias marriage of
convenience with the Arrellano Felix cartel based in Tijuana, Mexico, illustrates the dangerous potential of
such alliances. The May 3, 2001, 12 ton cocaine seizure on the Russian and Ukrainian-crewed Svesda Maru
constituted the largest cocaine bust in U.S. maritime history. The money and arms obtained by the
Arrellano Felix mob through their linkages with Russian crime groups unquestionably make the Tijuana
cartel wealthier, more able to purchase Mexican police and political protection through bribery, and
better armed and equipped to ward of rival gangs or to resist Mexican and U.S. law enforcement eforts

The Russians preferred tactics of bribery, blackmail

and intimidation tend to exercise corrosive pressures on key private
and public sector institutions, thereby undermining individual
states abilities to preserve the stable economic and social
environment, efective law enforcement capacity and level playing
field required to promote legal business activity and attract foreign
investment essential to long-term economic growth. Traditional and
mounted against them.

longstanding patterns of patrimonial rule, personalism, clientelism, and bureaucratic corruption throughout
Latin America have encouraged and facilitated Russian crime groups resorts to these favored tactics (as

Time and again, many (although

certainly not all) police and customs officials, military officers,
judges, politicians, and businessmen have proven susceptible to
such enticements in large and small countries alike throughout the
region.[86] The Russian mafias expanding presence in Latin America and the Caribbean does not
they have for domestic criminal organizations as well).

currently constitute a direct security threat to either the individual states of the region or to the United
States. It does, however,

contribute indirectly to the entire regions growing

WFI 13
Pre Camp

35
Cuba Af

economic, social and political turmoil and insecurity and thus poses
a major challenge to economic growth, efective democratic
governance and long-run regime stability throughout the
hemisphere.

[H.] That causes global war

Rochlin 94 (James,. Professor of Political Science at Okanagan University

College. Discovering the Americas: the evolution of Canadian foreign policy

towards Latin America, p. 130-131)
While there were economic motivations for Canadian policy in Central America, security considerations
were perhaps more important. Canada possessed an interest in promoting stability in the face of a
potential decline of U.S. hegemony in the Americas. Perceptions of declining U.S. influence in the region
which had some credibility in 1979-1984 due to the wildly inequitable divisions of wealth in some U.S.
client states in Latin America, in addition to political repression, under-development, mounting external
debt, anti-American sentiment produced by decades of subjugation to U.S. strategic and economic
interests, and so on were linked to the prospect of explosive events occurring in the hemisphere. Hence,

the Central American imbroglio was viewed as a fuse which could

ignite a cataclysmic process throughout the region. Analysts at the
time worried that in a worst-case scenario, instability created by a
regional war, beginning in Central America and spreading elsewhere
in Latin America, might preoccupy Washington to the extent that the
United States would be unable to perform adequately its important
hegemonic role in the international arena a concern expressed by
the director of research for Canadas Standing Committee Report on
Central America. It was feared that such a predicament could
generate increased global instability and perhaps even a hegemonic
war. This is one of the motivations which led Canada to become involved in eforts at regional conflict
resolution, such as Contadora, as will be discussed in the next chapter.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

36
Cuba Af

Advantage Democracy
Promotion

WFI 13
Pre Camp

37
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Inherency Transition

Now
Cuban government reforms happening nowremoval of
the embargo key to sustain Cuban governmental and
economic transition
BBC Worldwide, 2011

[BBC Monitoring Latin America Political Supplied by BBC Worldwide

Monitoring, November 16, 2011 Wednesday, Think tank urges United States
to do more for Cuba, Lexis] Wyo-MB
Washington, 15 November: The Washington-based think tank, Centre for
Democracy in the Americas, is urging the United States to do more to
encourage market reforms and restructuring now underway in Cuba. "After
fifty years of sanctions, and a generation after the demise of the Cold War, it
is incumbent upon US policy makers to understand the changes
taking place in Cuba today and respond accordingly," it said in a new
report, adding that "the success or failure of the reform process will largely be
determined in Havana, not Washington". Although Cuba's economy is still
largely state-controlled, under President Raul Castro it has taken steps to
reduce the size of government by allowing Cuban citizens to operate
their own small businesses and form cooperatives. Castro has also
ended some state subsidies and began phasing out others, such as the
ration card. Other market-oriented reforms, such as allowing Cubans to
buy and sell homes and cars, were enacted this fall. But the report notes
advocates for reform of US policy towards Cuba, the big change announced
by Castro - laying of more than one million workers, about a fifth of the state
payroll - was "halted before it ever really got underway". The report says that
Cuba's problems "stem from the limited ways in which its economy
produces wealth, its heavy reliance on imports to feed its
population, growing domestic economic inequality, and the lack of
opportunities for citizens to productively use knowledge acquired
through advanced education". This year, the Cuba government is
expecting economic growth of 2.9 per cent, an improvement over 2010 when
the economy grew by 2.1 per cent. The study notes that many in the United
States question the sincerity of Cuba's reform eforts and whether they are
permanent. Cuba experimented with economic liberalization in the 1990s
after the collapse of the Soviet bloc sent its economy into a downward spiral.
It allowed self-employment in 160 occupations, and by 1996 more than
200,000 Cubans had licenses to work for themselves. But as Cuba emerged
from the post-Soviet crisis in the late 1990s, it began to roll back the
reforms . "Despite doubts on both sides of the Florida Straits, the
evidence leads us to conclude that Cuba's reform process is here to
stay," the report noted, recommending that US policymakers
acknowledge that Cuba's reforms are real. For more than 50 years,
the centrepiece of US policy on Cuba has been the embargo against
the Spanish-speaking Caribbean island in an efort to choke of the
government economically. "In the final analysis, ending the embargo
and normalizing relations with Cuba ought to be a foreign policy

WFI 13
Pre Camp

38
Cuba Af

priority of the United States," says the report. To lift the embargo
would take an act of Congress.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

39
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Solvency New

Strategy Key
US Policy to Cuba fails to promote human rights and
democracy, removing embargo is key to a new strategy
Amash, 2012
[Brandon, Contributing writer of Prospect Journal of International Afairs at
UCSD, EVALUATING THE CUBAN EMBARGO, 7-22-12,
http://prospectjournal.org/2012/07/23/evaluating-the-cuban-embargo/] /WyoMB
Cuba has a long record of violating the fundamental human rights of
freedom of opinion, thought, expression, and the right to dissent; the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly protects these rights in Articles
19 and 21. Article 19 states that everyone has the right to freedom of
opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through
any media and regardless of frontiers. Article 21 similarly states that
everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country []
(UDHR). The purpose of this proposal is to provide the United States with an
alternative foreign policy approach toward Cuba that will improve
human rights conditions and foster democracy in the country.
Namely, I argue that the embargo policy should be abandoned and
replaced with a policy based on modeling appropriate behavior,
providing support and resources to developing democratic systems
and encouraging participation in multilateral institutions. In the
following pages, I will describe the historical context of the situation, critique
the embargo policy and advocate for the normalization of relations with Cuba
as a stronger approach to improving human rights and espousing democracy.
It is essential to carefully consider this proposal as a viable policy
alternative for promoting democracy and protecting human rights in
Cuba because the current embargo policy has proven to be
inefective in advancing these goals. Developing more efective
approaches to similar situations of democratization and promotion
of ideals has been a foreign policy goal of the United States since
before the Cold War. However, despite the vast shifts in the
international climate following the end of the Cold War, U.S. policy
towards Cuba has not adapted. As such, this proposal highlights the
need for a fresh policy toward our neighbor and bitter rival.

Squo embargo tanks US-Cuban relations, and the

embargo fails to promote democracy and human rights
Amash, 2012

[Brandon, Contributing writer of Prospect Journal of International Afairs at

UCSD, EVALUATING THE CUBAN EMBARGO, 7-22-12,
http://prospectjournal.org/2012/07/23/evaluating-the-cuban-embargo/] /WyoMB
The United States and Cuba have been on unstable terms since the
colonization of both countries by the British and Spanish Empires,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

40
Cuba Af

respectively. Following Cubas independence from Spain and the ensuing

Spanish-American War, Cuban-American relations began to deteriorate:
Cubans resented American intervention in their independence,
afraid of leaving one empire only to be conquered by another.
However, the human rights violations in question did not become a problem
until after the Cuban Revolution in the 1950s, following the rise of Fidel
Castros communist regime. After the revolution, Cuban laws imposed limits
on the freedoms of expression and association, efectively undermining the
basic human rights of freedom of opinion and dissent. According to Clark, De
Fana and Sanchez, given the totalitarian nature of the country, in which all
communications media are in the hands of the omnipotent State-Party, it is
physically impossible to express any dissenting political opinion [] (Clark
65). Threatened by these blatantly antidemocratic policies, America
had to do something. The United States placed trade embargoes,
economic sanctions, and travel bans on Cuba in an attempt to
combat the communist regime and human rights violations (Carter
334). Today, diplomatic relations with Cuba remain extremely
strained, although Americas embargo policy has tightened and
relaxed in concert with its domestic political climate. Most recently,
President Obama has reversed tighter restrictions on Cuban American family
travel and remittances, as well as announcing that U.S.
telecommunications companies may seek licenses to do business in Cuba
(Carter 336). However, despite the ever-evolving policy and the fluid
international climate, little progress has been made in improving the
human rights situation in Cuba, let alone the overall promotion of
democratic ideals. The embargo policy is based on the idea that
economic denial will bring about continued economic failure in Cuba,
thereby creating popular dissatisfaction with the government while
simultaneously weakening the governments ability to repress this
popular dissent, leading to the destabilization of the regime and,
ultimately, its collapse (Seaman 39). In the following section, I will
explain how these objectives have not been realized.

Ending the embargo is the only way to mobilize the public

in Cuba to push for democratic reform
Perez, 2010
[Louis, e J. Carlyle Sitterson professor of history and the director of the
Institute for the Study of the Americas at the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, Want change in Cuba? End U.S. embargo, 9-21-10,
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/09/20/perez.cuba.embargo/index.html]
/Wyo-MB
The Obama administration, he said, wanted "to promote respect for human
rights and fundamental freedoms ... in ways that will empower the Cuban
people and advance our national interests." Fine words. But if the
administration really wanted to do something in the national
interest, it would end the 50-year-old policy of political and
economic isolation of Cuba. The Cuban embargo can no longer even
pretend to be plausible.On the contrary, it has contributed to the
very conditions that stifle democracy and human rights there. For 50
years, its brunt has fallen mainly on the Cuban people. This is not by

WFI 13
Pre Camp

41
Cuba Af

accident. On the contrary, the embargo was designed to impose

sufering and hunger on Cubans in the hope that they would rise up
and overturn their government. "The only foreseeable means of
alienating internal support," the Department of State insisted as early as April
1960, "is through disenchantment and disafection based on
economic dissatisfaction and hardship." The United States tightened
the screws in the post-Soviet years with the Torricelli Act and the HelmsBurton Act -- measures designed, Sen. Robert Torricelli said, "to wreak havoc
on that island." The post-Soviet years were indeed calamitous. Throughout
the 1990s, Cubans faced growing scarcities, deteriorating services and
increased rationing. Meeting the needs of ordinary life took extraordinary
efort. And therein lies the problem that still bedevils U.S. policy today. Far
from inspiring the Cuban people to revolution, the embargo keeps
them down and distracted. Dire need and urgent want are hardly
optimum circumstances for a people to contemplate the benefits of
democracy. A people preoccupied with survival have little interest or
inclination to bestir themselves in behalf of anything else. In Cuba,
routine household errands and chores consume overwhelming amounts of
time and energy, day after day: hours in lines at the local grocery store or
waiting for public transportation. Cubans in vast numbers choose to
emigrate. Others burrow deeper into the black market, struggling to make do
and carry on. Many commit suicide. (Cuba has one of the highest suicide
rates in the world; in 2000, the latest year for which we have statistics, it was
16.4 per 100,000 people.) A June 2008 survey in The New York Times
reported that less than 10 percent of Cubans identified the lack of political
freedom as the island's main problem. As one Cuban colleague recently
suggested to me: "First necessities, later democracy." The United States
should consider a change of policy, one that would ofer Cubans
relief from the all-consuming ordeal of daily life. Improved material
circumstances would allow Cubans to turn their attention to other
aspirations. Ending the embargo would also imply respect for the
Cuban people, an acknowledgment that they have the vision and
vitality to enact needed reforms, and that transition in Cuba,
whatever form it may take, is wholly a Cuban afair. A good-faith efort to
engage Cuba, moreover, would counter the common perception
there that the United States is a threat to its sovereignty. It would
deny Cuban leaders the chance to use U.S. policy as pretext to limit
public debate and stifle dissent -- all to the good of democracy and
human rights. And it would serve the national interest.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

42
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion AT: Emboldens

Hardliners
Removing the sanctions prevents emboldening hardliners
in Cuba and opens up the possibility of efective
democratic transitions
Bandow, 2012

[Douglas, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to
former US president Ronald Reagan, Time to End the Cuba Embargo, 12-1112, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/time-end-cubaembargo] /Wyo-MB
It is far past time to end the embargo. During the Cold War, Cuba
ofered a potential advanced military outpost for the Soviet Union. Indeed,
that role led to the Cuban missile crisis. With the failure of the U.S.-supported
Bay of Pigs invasion, economic pressure appeared to be Washingtons best
strategy for ousting the Castro dictatorship. However, the end of the Cold
War left Cuba strategically irrelevant. It is a poor country with little
ability to harm the United States. The Castro regime might still
encourage unrest, but its survival has no measurable impact on any
important U.S. interest. The regime remains a humanitarian travesty, of
course. Nor are Cubans the only victims: three years ago the regime jailed a
State Department contractor for distributing satellite telephone equipment in
Cuba. But Havana is not the only regime to violate human rights. Moreover,
experience has long demonstrated that it is virtually impossible for
outsiders to force democracy. Washington often has used sanctions
and the Office of Foreign Assets Control currently is enforcing around 20 such
programs, mostly to little efect. The policy in Cuba obviously has
failed. The regime remains in power. Indeed, it has consistently used
the embargo to justify its own mismanagement, blaming poverty on
America. Observed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: It is my personal
belief that the Castros do not want to see an end to the embargo and
do not want to see normalization with the United States, because
they would lose all of their excuses for what hasnt happened in
Cuba in the last 50 years. Similarly, Cuban exile Carlos Saladrigas of the
Cuba Study Group argued that keeping the embargo, maintaining this
hostility, all it does is strengthen and embolden the hardliners. Cuban
human rights activists also generally oppose sanctions. A decade ago I
(legally) visited Havana, where I met Elizardo Sanchez Santa Cruz, who
sufered in communist prisons for eight years. He told me that the
sanctions policy gives the government a good alibi to justify the
failure of the totalitarian model in Cuba. Indeed, it is only by posing
as an opponent of Yanqui Imperialism that Fidel Castro has achieved
an international reputation. If he had been ignored by Washington,
he never would have been anything other than an obscure
authoritarian windbag.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

43
Cuba Af

Only a risk that maintaining the embargo does more harm

than good
Bandow, 2012
[Douglas, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to
former US president Ronald Reagan, Time to End the Cuba Embargo, 12-1112, http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/time-end-cubaembargo] /Wyo-MB
There is essentially no international support for continuing the
embargo. For instance, the European Union plans to explore improving
relations with Havana. Spains Deputy Foreign Minister Gonzalo de Benito
explained that the EU saw a positive evolution in Cuba. The hope, then, is to
move forward in the relationship between the European Union and Cuba. The
administration should move now, before congressmen are focused on the
next election. President Obama should propose legislation to drop (or at
least significantly loosen) the embargo. He also could use his authority to
relax sanctions by, for instance, granting more licenses to visit the island.
Ending the embargo would have obvious economic benefits for both
Cubans and Americans. The U.S. International Trade Commission
estimates American losses alone from the embargo as much as $1.2
billion annually. Expanding economic opportunities also might
increase pressure within Cuba for further economic reform. So far the
regime has taken small steps, but rejected significant change. Moreover,
thrusting more Americans into Cuban society could help undermine
the ruling system. Despite Fidel Castros decline, Cuban politics remains
largely static. A few human rights activists have been released, while Raul
Castro has used party purges to entrench loyal elites. Lifting the embargo
would be no panacea. Other countries invest in and trade with Cuba
to no obvious political impact. And the lack of widespread economic
reform makes it easier for the regime rather than the people to
collect the benefits of trade, in contrast to China. Still, more U.S.
contact would have an impact. Argued trade specialist Dan Griswold,
American tourists would boost the earnings of Cubans who rent
rooms, drive taxis, sell art, and operate restaurants in their homes.
Those dollars would then find their way to the hundreds of freely
priced farmers markets, to carpenters, repairmen, tutors, food
venders, and other entrepreneurs. The Castro dictatorship
ultimately will end up in historys dustbin. But it will continue to cause
much human hardship along the way. The Heritage Foundations John
Sweeney complained nearly two decades ago that the United States must
not abandon the Cuban people by relaxing or lifting the trade embargo
against the communist regime. But the dead hand of half a century of
failed policy is the worst breach of faith with the Cuban people.
Lifting sanctions would be a victory not for Fidel Castro, but for the
power of free people to spread liberty. As Griswold argued,
commercial engagement is the best way to encourage more open
societies abroad. Of course, there are no guarantees. But lifting the
embargo would have a greater likelihood of success than continuing
a policy which has failed. Some day the Cuban people will be free.
Allowing more contact with Americans likely would make that day
come sooner.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

44
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Internal Link Latin

American key to Global Democracy Promotion
Empowering democracy promotion in Latin America is a
key part of global democracy promotion
Curtis, 2011
[Lisa, Senior Research Fellow for South Asia in the Asian Studies Center at
The Heritage Foundation, Championing Liberty Abroad to Counter Islamist
Extremism, 2-9-11,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/02/championing-libertyabroad-to-counter-islamist-extremism] /Wyo-MB
As the U.S. promotes democratic principles and institutions abroad,
it also needs to be aware of eforts by autocratic forces to counter
democratic progress. Leaders of autocratic regimes, especially those
who rely on economic windfalls from extractive industries or are part of an
oligarchy whose interests are served by the states wealth, seek to
undercut support for indigenous democratic movements and have
become increasingly adept at doing so. Authoritarian regimes often
invest significant resources into managing and manipulating the
media to promote anti-democratic values. Autocrats are also becoming
skilled in establishing pseudo-democracies and using the word
democracy to argue for anti-democratic standards.[28] The U.S. needs to
better understand these anti-democratic forces in individual
countries and actively counter their strategies. United States Institute
of Peace Vice President Steven Heydemann has recently written about a
phenomenon he calls authoritarian learning. Heydemann asserts that
authoritarian states are beginning to organize themselves into a group that is
systematically seeking to counterbalance Western, liberal democratic order.
He argues that Iran, Russia, Venezuela, China, and other authoritarian
states coordinate their policies and share success stories of
deflecting pressure to democratize. They share this authoritarian
learning with Arab regimes to help them resist Western pressure
for political reform.[29] Chinas rapid economic growth under an autocratic
regime has made the authoritarian model of governance more appealing and
thus poses a serious challenge to democratic reform.[30] A recent Freedom
House survey confirms a global decline in political rights and civil
liberties as the number of countries practicing democracy fell for the
fourth consecutive year. The decline is attributed to restrictions on the free
flow of information in China, brutal crackdowns on protesters in Iran and
Egypt, and murder of human rights activists in Russia.[31] Freedom House
also emphasizes that instituting democracy involves far more than holding
elections.[32] It means developing a vibrant and free civil society, functioning
and credible political parties, and active and free media. There is the added
complication of politicization of institutions that are supposed to monitor and
oversee democratic processes. A recent example is the widespread
perception of political interference by Afghan President Hamid Karzai in the
countrys Electoral Complaints Commission, which has tainted Afghanistans
2010 parliamentary elections. In February 2010, Karzai used an emergency

WFI 13
Pre Camp

45
Cuba Af

decree to give himself authority to appoint all provincial complaints

commissioners.[33] The U.S. does not have the luxury of ignoring
autocratic regimes and often must engage with them to achieve
specific U.S. foreign policy objectives. At the same time, the U.S.
should not shy away from supporting civil society leaders and
defenders of human rights in these countries. In some cases, U.S.
diplomatic leverage has played a significant role in nudging an
autocratic regime in a more democratic direction.[34] For example, in
the 1980s, American diplomats pursued two-track policies of maintaining
state-to-state relations with autocratic regimes in Latin America
while pushing for democratic change when opportunities arose.[35]
In pursuing this two-track approach, U.S. public statements take on more
weight. U.S. presidential statements in support of democracy
promotion empower civil society leaders seeking democratic change
and undermine their opponents.[36]

WFI 13
Pre Camp

46
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Impact Terrorism

Democracy promotion is key to solve extremism,
terrorism, and anti-americanism
Curtis, 2011

[Lisa, Senior Research Fellow for South Asia in the Asian Studies Center at
The Heritage Foundation, Championing Liberty Abroad to Counter Islamist
Extremism, 2-9-11,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/02/championing-libertyabroad-to-counter-islamist-extremism] /Wyo-MB
The Obama Administration needs to continue its new-found
commitment to supporting democratic ideals and institutions around
the globe, especially in Muslim-majority countries where extremist
movements threaten liberal freedoms and, in some cases, the
stability of the state. Encouraging democratic values will not only
help to protect citizens from human rights abuses by authoritarian
regimes, but also provide a bulwark against Islamist extremist
movements. Part of the efort to counter extremist ideology will necessarily
include demonstrating that Muslim-majority countries and democratic
principles are compatible. The strategy should also involve countering
Islamists, who may not publicly support terrorism but still seek to
subvert democratic systems and pursue an ideology that leads to
discrimination against religious minorities. The wave of protests
against authoritarian rule currently sweeping the Middle East is
forcing the Obama Administration to make tough decisions on how
the U.S. will promote democracy and concepts of liberty while
guarding against the possibility of abrupt political changes that antiAmerican Islamists can exploit to their advantage. The stakes could
not be higher for U.S. interests, especially since the outcome of the
current wave of unrest could profoundly afect both Islamist
movements throughout the Muslim world and support for al-Qaeda and its
terrorist agenda.

Democracy promotion is a critical long term strategy to

fight terrorism
Curtis, 2011
[Lisa, Senior Research Fellow for South Asia in the Asian Studies Center at
The Heritage Foundation, Championing Liberty Abroad to Counter Islamist
Extremism, 2-9-11,
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2011/02/championing-libertyabroad-to-counter-islamist-extremism] /Wyo-MB
The fight against extremism is largely an ideological battle, and the
principles of democratic governance and rule by the people are a
powerful antidote to Islamist extremists message of intolerance,
hatred, and repression. Daniel Benjamin, current Coordinator for
Counterterrorism at the State Department, noted in a 2008 academic paper
that [t]he U.S. needs a long-term strategy that makes Muslim
societies less incubators for radicalism and more satisfiers of

WFI 13
Pre Camp

47
Cuba Af

fundamental human needs.[15] In a joint report prepared for the 2008

U.S. presidential campaign, the presidents of the International Republican
Institute and the National Democratic Institute emphasized the importance of
democratizing societies as a way to reduce extremism by allowing
avenues of dissent, alternation of power, and protections for
minorities.[16] Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith,
in an academic paper in 2010, also points to the need to promote ideas
favorable to individual rights in Muslim societies. Rather than focus solely
on messaging Muslim communities, Feith argues that U.S. policy
must also develop efective ways to stimulate debate among
Muslims themselves on the extremist ideologies promoted by alQaeda and other terrorist organizations.[17] More specifically, the
[k]ey objective is not to induce Muslims to like the U.S. but to
encourage them to reject understandings of Islam that condone and
even encourage violence and subversion against the U.S. and the
West.[18] The U.S. needs to implement strategies to counter
Islamists who may not publicly condone terrorism but still seek to
subvert democratic systems.[19] To do so successfully, the U.S. will
need to engage with Muslim groups and leaders, but it must
navigate this terrain carefully. The American model of religious liberty
includes a favorable view of religious practice, both private and public, and
assumes that religious leaders will take an active role in society.[20] While
they may participate in the political process, Islamists ideology often
leads to discrimination against religious minorities and other antidemocratic measures and fuels support for terrorism. After all,
Islamist ideology helped to form the basis for the development of alQaeda and other terrorist organizations.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

48
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Impact Laundry List

Human rights and democracy promotion establish stable
partners for the United States that are key to solve
climate change, food security, global health issues, and
conflict
USAID, 2013

[US agency for international development, IMPORTANCE OF DEMOCRACY,

HUMAN RIGHTS, & GOVERNANCE TO DEVELOPMENT, 5-13-13,
http://www.usaid.gov/what-we-do/democracy-human-rights-andgovernance/importance-democracy-human-rights-governance] /Wyo-MB
USAID recognizes that long-term, sustainable development is closely
linked to sound democratic governance and the protection of human
rights. We view the democracy, human rights, and governance (DRG) sector
not in isolation but as a critical framework in which all aspects of
development must advance together. Our projects in health,
education, climate change, and food security will not be efective
and sustainable unless we work to: Support legitimate, inclusive and
sound governance. Protect the basic rights of citizens. Support stable
and peaceful democratic transitions. USAID Administrator Rajiv Shah has
called for a united approach to integrate democracy, human rights,
and governance considerations with socio-economic sectors in pursuit
of broader U.S. development objectives. The Administrator recognizes
that inclusive, accountable, and democratic governments are
necessary and critical for ensuring that communities can withstand
conflict and/or other shocks and that development gains are not lost,
as well as creating stable partners for the United States.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

49
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Impact Economic

Growth
Democracy promotion solves economic growth
Lagon, 2011

[Mark, adjunct Senior Fellow for Human Rights Council of Foreign Relations,
February 2011, Promoting Democracy: The Whys and Hows for the United
States and the International Community, http://www.cfr.org/democracypromotion/promoting-democracy-whys-hows-united-states-internationalcommunity/p24090] /Wyo-MB
There has long been controversy about whether democracy enhances
economic development. The dramatic growth of China certainly challenges
this notion. Still, history will likely show that democracy yields the
most prosperity. Notwithstanding the global financial turbulence of the past
three years, democracys elements facilitate long-term economic
growth. These elements include above all freedom of expression and
learning to promote innovation, and rule of law to foster
predictability for investors and stop corruption from stunting
growth. It is for that reason that the UN Development Programme (UNDP)
and the 2002 UN Financing for Development Conference in Monterey, Mexico,
embraced good governance as the enabler of development. These
elements have unleashed new emerging powers such as India and
Brazil and raised the quality of life for impoverished peoples. Those
who argue that economic development will eventually yield political freedoms
may be reversing the order of influencesor at least discounting the
reciprocal relationship between political and economic liberalization. Finally,
democracy afords all groups equal access to justiceand equal
opportunity to shine as assets in a countrys economy. Democracys
support for pluralism prevents human assetsincluding religious
and ethnic minorities, women, and migrantsfrom being
squandered. Indeed, a shortage of economic opportunities and
outlets for grievances has contributed significantly to the ongoing
upheaval in the Middle East. Pluralism is also precisely what is
needed to stop violent extremism from wreaking havoc on the world.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

50
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Impact War

Efective democracy promotion solves war, terrorism and
instability
Epstien et al, 2007

[Susan B. Epstein, Nina M. Serafino, and Francis T. Miko Specialists in Foreign

Policy Foreign Afairs, Defense, and Trade Division Congressional research
service, Democracy Promotion: Cornerstone of U.S. Foreign Policy?, 12-26-7,
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/crs/rl34296.pdf] /Wyo-MB
A common rationale ofered by proponents of democracy promotion,
including former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and current Secretary
of State Condoleezza Rice, is that democracies do not go to war with
one another. This is sometimes referred to as the democratic peace
theory. Experts point to European countries, the United States,
Canada, and Mexico as present-day examples. According to President
Clintons National Security Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement:
Democracies create free markets that ofer economic opportunity,
make for more reliable trading partners, and are far less likely to
wage war on one another.22 Some have refined this democracy peace
theory by distinguishing between mature democracies and those in
transition, suggesting that mature democracies do not fight wars with
each other, but that countries transitioning toward democracy are more
prone to being attacked (because of weak governmental institutions) or
being aggressive toward others. States that made transitions from an
autocracy toward early stages of democracy and were involved in hostilities
soon after include France in the mid-1800s under Napoleon III,
Prussia/Germany under Bismarck (1870-1890), Chile shortly before the War
of the Pacific in 1879, Serbias multiparty constitutional monarchy before the
Balkan Wars of the late 20th Century, and Pakistans military guided pseudodemocracy before its wars with India in 1965 and 1971.23 The George W.
Bush Administration asserts that democracy promotion is a long-term
antidote to terrorism. The Administrations Strategy for Winning the
War on Terror asserts that inequality in political participation and
access to wealth resources in a country, lack of freedom of speech,
and poor education all breed volatility. By promoting basic human
rights, freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, association and press, and
by maintaining order within their borders and providing an
independent justice system, efective democracies can defeat
terrorism in the long run, according to the Bush White House.24 Another
reason given to encourage democracies (although debated by some experts)
is the belief that democracies promote economic prosperity. From this
perspective, as the rule of law leads to a more stable society and as
equal economic opportunity for all helps to spur economic activity,
economic growth, particularly of per capita income, is likely to
follow. In addition, a democracy under this scenario may be more
likely to be viewed by other countries as a good trading partner and
by outside investors as a more stable environment for investment, according
to some experts. Moreover, countries that have developed as stable

WFI 13
Pre Camp

51
Cuba Af

democracies are viewed as being more likely to honor treaties,

according to some experts.25

WFI 13
Pre Camp

52
Cuba Af

Democracy Promotion Impact Laundry List

DEMOCRACY IS NECESSARY TO AVERT NUCLEAR WAR AND
EXTINCTION
CARNEGIE COMMISSION ON PREVENTING DEADLY CONFLICT,
Promoting Democracy in the 1990s, October 1995. Available from the
World Wide Web at: http://www.carnegie.org/sub/pubs/deadly/dia95_01.html,
accessed 2/20/04.
OTHER THREATS This hardly exhausts the lists of threats to our security and
well-being in the coming years and decades. In the former Yugoslavia
nationalist aggression tears at the stability of Europe and could easily spread.
The flow of illegal drugs intensifies through increasingly powerful
international crime syndicates that have made common cause with
authoritarian regimes and have utterly corrupted the institutions of tenuous,
democratic ones. Nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons continue to
proliferate. The very source of life on Earth, the global ecosystem, appears
increasingly endangered. Most of these new and unconventional threats to
security are associated with or aggravated by the weakness or absence of
democracy, with its provisions for legality, accountability, popular
sovereignty, and openness. LESSONS OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY The
experience of this century ofers important lessons. Countries that govern
themselves in a truly democratic fashion do not go to war with one another.
They do not aggress against their neighbors to aggrandize themselves or
glorify their leaders. Democratic governments do not ethnically "cleanse"
their own populations, and they are much less likely to face ethnic
insurgency. Democracies do not sponsor terrorism against one another. They
do not build weapons of mass destruction to use on or to threaten one
another. Democratic countries form more reliable, open, and enduring trading
partnerships. In the long run they ofer better and more stable climates for
investment. They are more environmentally responsible because they must
answer to their own citizens, who organize to protest the destruction of their
environments. They are better bets to honor international treaties since they
value legal obligations and because their openness makes it much more
difficult to breach agreements in secret. Precisely because, within their own
borders, they respect competition, civil liberties, property rights, and the rule
of law, democracies are the only reliable foundation on which a new world
order of international security and prosperity can be built.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

53
Cuba Af

Advantage Economy

WFI 13
Pre Camp

54
Cuba Af

Economy Solvency Spurs Growth

Lifting embargo leads to US-Cuba engagement and
bolsters reforms in Cuba, and spurs growth of American
economic interests
Hanson, Batten, and Ealey, 2013
[Daniel, Dayne, and Harrison, Daniel Hanson is an economics researcher at
the American Enterprise Institute. Dayne Batten is affiliated with the
University of North Carolina Department of Public Policy. Harrison Ealey is a
financial analyst, It's Time For The U.S. To End Its Senseless Embargo Of
Cuba, 1-16-13, http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/01/16/its-time-forthe-u-s-to-end-its-senseless-embargo-of-cuba/] /Wyo-MB
Whats worse, U.S. sanctions encourage Cuba to collaborate with
regional players that are less friendly to American interests. For
instance, in 2011, the country inked a deal with Venezuela for the
construction of an underwater communications link, circumventing
its need to connect with US-owned networks close to its shores.
Repealing the embargo would fit into an American precedent of
lifting trade and travel restrictions to countries who demonstrate
progress towards democratic ideals. Romania, Czechoslovakia, and
Hungary were all ofered normal trade relations in the 1970s after
preliminary reforms even though they were still in clear violation of several
US resolutions condemning their human rights practices. China, a
communist country and perennial human rights abuser, is the U.S.s
second largest trading partner, and in November, trade restrictions
against Myanmar were lessened notwithstanding a fifty year history of
genocide and human trafficking propagated by its military government.
Which, of course, begs the question: when will the U.S. see fit to lift the
embargo? If Cuba is trending towards democracy and free markets,
what litmus test must be passed for the embargo to be rolled back?
The cost of the embargo to the United States is high in both dollar
and moral terms, but it is higher for the Cuban people, who are cut of from
the supposed champion of liberty in their hemisphere because of an
antiquated Cold War dispute. The progress being made in Cuba could
be accelerated with the help of American charitable relief, business
innovation, and tourism. A perpetual embargo on a developing
nation that is moving towards reform makes little sense, especially
when Americas allies are openly hostile to the embargo. It keeps a
broader discussion about smart reform in Cuba from gaining life, and
it makes no economic sense. It is time for the embargo to go.

Lifting the embargo spurs two-way economic growth in

multiple sectors of the United States and Cuban
economies
Brinkley, 2012
[Joel Brinkley, a professor of journalism at Stanford University, is a Pulitzer
Prize-winning former foreign correspondent for The New York Times, Cuba
embargo isn't working but isn't going away,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

55
Cuba Af

http://www.politico.com/story/2012/12/cuba-embargo-isnt-working-but-isntgoing-away-85281_Page2.html] /Wyo-MB
Now an argument can be made that if the half-century of political
paralysis on this issue can be overcome, both Cuba and the United
States would benefit. American tourists would most likely pour into
Cuba, buying cigars, staying in beachfront hotels spending money
in the Cuban economy. And American businesses would find an eager
new market for a range of products beyond the food and medicine they
are already authorized to sell. We cannot aford an obsolete ideological
war against Cuba, Richard Slatta, a history professor at North Carolina
State University who specializes in Latin America, wrote in an op-ed last
month. The embargo against Cuba denies North Carolina businesses
and farmers access to a major, proximate market. Cuba experts say
many business leaders, particularly, are making the same case,
especially now that the American economy has remained in the
doldrums for so long. They add that its an obvious second-term issue;
Obama doesnt have to worry about winning Florida again.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

56
Cuba Af

Economy Solvency Relations Solve Economic

Interdependence
Cuban relations are key to global economic
interdependence
Lievan 7 (Anatal. "Its Time to Trade with Cuba," International Herald
Tribune, April 26,
cuba.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2007/its_time_to_trade_with_cuba_
5261)
To things should be clear concerning Americas Cuba policy: Everything the
United States has tried over the past five decades has failed, and it
is high time that Washington does something to help transform the
countrys Communist system. The impending transition of power from
Fidel Castro to his brother Ral gives Washington the chance to adopt a new
strategy. But if the United States sticks to the current approach it will help
consolidate Communist rule for many years to come. A changed stance is
crucial for many reasons, not least because it ofers the chance to cut the
link between Cubas professional skills and Venezuelan oil wealth.
Thanks to its great success in education, Cuba has large reserves of
well-trained doctors, nurses, teachers and engineers. The
government of Hugo Chvez can now pay for these professionals to
help not only Venezuelans, but people in many other countries.
Venezuela is heavily out-spending the United States in humanitarian
and development aid in the region, and Cuban skills are making
Venezuelan money efective. This is occurring not just in Latin
America. Cuban aid, paid for by Caracas, is now going to earthquake
victims in Asia. All of this is not bad in itself. The danger is that this
Cuban-Venezuelan axis will stimulate anti-American populism across
the whole region. If the risks of keeping the status quo in place
seem obvious, it is even more evident that Washingtons travel bans,
economic sanctions, and the refusal to extend diplomatic ties to Cuba
have not only failed, they have damaged Washingtons interests.
These tough measures have harmed both ordinary Cubans and
Washingtons relations with Latin America and Europe. They have
strengthened Cubas Communist regime by increasing the states
grip on key economic resources, and they have helped cement
Cubas alliance with Venezuela. Since we have not succeeded in bullying
the Cubans into submission, we should try to woo them by ofering trade with
the United States and integration into the international market system. How
long could the Communist economy -- or the Communist government -survive such an opening? There may be good arguments for imposing tough
sanctions against particular countries at particular times to bring about
specific policy changes. This is true of the sanctions imposed on Iran and
North Korea to curb their nuclear ambitions. But for such sanctions to
work they must have international support, and, in the case of Cuba,
there is no chance of this whatsoever. There is a key practical and
ethical diference between sanctions with specific goals and sanctions
extended over decades that are intended to bring about regime change.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

57
Cuba Af

Sanctions leveled against Iran today may be justified. But U.S. sanctions
imposed in the era before President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to power
blocked Iranian reforms, undermined the countrys liberals, strengthened the
clerical regimes grip on the economy and perpetuated its rule. The
Washington establishment talks of the superiority of the free market
system, and Americas duty to spread that system in the world.
Capitalism is by no means a cure-all, and even a capitalist Cuba might still
challenge U.S. policies. Nonetheless, the course of human development
would tend to suggest that free market states are far more likely to try
to resolve their problems in ways that do not disrupt the
international economic stability on which all depend.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

58
Cuba Af

Economy Solvency Trade Relations

Lifting the embargo solves trade relations and bolsters US
national interests abroad
Pomerantz, 2013
[Phyllis, professor of the practice of public policy at Duke Universitys Sanford
School of Public Policy and a former staf member of the World Bank, Nows
the time to lift the U.S. embargo on Cuba, 1-1-13,
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/nows-the-time-to-lift-the-usembargo-on-cuba/article6790494/] /Wyo-MB
Yet, Cuba is still treated as a pariah, a bizarre relic of the Cold War. I just
returned from a visit there and realized that lifting the embargo would be
to both countries advantage. Americans would have full access to
Cubas rich culture and natural beauty, and some new trade and
investment opportunities. Cuba would have expanded economic
options, which it needs to improve the material well-being of its
citizens. The U.S. has had normal diplomatic and commercial
relationships with regimes and despots of all stripes from Mobutu in
Zaire to Mubarak in Egypt. The list is long. So what makes Cuba so special?
Is it because it is so close to the continental United States? No the U.S. has
had a good, if testy, formal relationship with Mexico for many years, including
when it was a one-party state. Is it because Cuba poses a military threat?
Maybe, once upon a time. But if Americans got over the Vietnam War, they
surely can put the Cuban (or was that Soviet?) missile crisis behind them,
especially since the U.S. now has quite a normal relationship with Russia.
What about a security threat? Arguably, almost every country could be
wittingly or unwittingly harboring extremist plotters. Somehow, though, I
dont think al-Qaeda operatives are drinking mojitos on Cuban beaches. Cuba
loosened its ban on organized religion some time ago, but imagining either
the government or its people sympathetic to Islamic fundamentalism is quite
a stretch. Is it because Cuba lacks economic opportunities for U.S. business?
Granted, its not a potential powerhouse such as Russia, China or even
Vietnam for commercial purposes. But the U.S. has maintained good
relationships (and made money) with many small, poor countries. Whats one
more? Is it because Americans are standing on principle over Cubas humanrights record or strident rhetoric? Its hard to argue this when the White
House has entertained leaders of countries with even worse records and
positions. Moreover, many of those countries do not have education, healthcare or food systems that reach the poor. Cuba does, although increasingly it
is a challenge. Of course, America should care about human rights
and, along with that, everyone should have access to adequate food,
education and health care. But sadly, none of these reasons explain
why the U.S. keeps a strict embargo on Cuba and has no diplomatic
relationship with it. No, the real reason is because of a small vocal
minority (Cuban-American exiles and their families) who happen to be
clustered in an electoral swing state (Florida) that gives them political clout.
Some say the attitudes of the younger generation are softening toward Cuba.
Does Washington really need to wait another generation or two? The U.S.
stand on Cuba is incomprehensible and only serves to look

WFI 13
Pre Camp

59
Cuba Af

hypocritical and arbitrary in the eyes of a world that doesnt

understand the intricacies of American politics. Now that the election is
over, there is a window of opportunity to open up a full commercial
and diplomatic relationship. Mr. Obama should use the full extent of
his executive powers to immediately relax restrictions, and Congress
should pass legislation lifting the remaining legal obstacles. Its
time to forget about old grudges and remember that the best way to
convert an enemy into a friend is to embrace him. Instead of
admiring Havanas old cars, Americans should be selling them new
ones.

Plan solves US-Cuban relations, boosts economic growth

and trade, and fosters democratic ideals in Cuba
Griswold, 2009
[Daniel, director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the Cato Institute in
Washington, D.C., The US Embargo of Cuba Is a Failure, 6-15-9,
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/us-embargo-cuba-is-failure]
/Wyo-MB
Obama should lift the embargo. Allowing more travel and farm
exports to Cuba will be good for democracy and the economy After
nearly 50 years, Americas cold war embargo against Cuba appears to be
thawing at last. Earlier this spring, the Obama administration relaxed controls
on travel and remittances to the communist island by Cuban Americans, and
last week it agreed to open the door for Cubas re-entry to the Organisation
of American States. Admitting Cuba to the OAS may be premature, given the
organisations charter that requires its members to be democracies that
respect human rights, but changes to the US economic embargo are
long overdue. The embargo has been a failure by every measure. It
has not changed the course or nature of the Cuban government. It
has not liberated a single Cuban citizen. In fact, the embargo has
made the Cuban people a bit more impoverished, without making
them one bit more free. At the same time, it has deprived Americans
of their freedom to travel and has cost US farmers and other
producers billions of dollars of potential exports. Congress and
President Barack Obama should act now to lift the embargo to allow
more travel and farm exports to Cuba. As a tool of US foreign
policy, the embargo actually enhances the Castro governments
standing by giving it a handy excuse for the failures of the islands
Caribbean-style socialism. Brothers Fidel and Raul can rail for hours about
the sufering the embargo inflicts on Cubans, even though the damage done
by their communist policies has been far worse. The embargo has failed to
give us an ounce of extra leverage over what happens in Havana. In
2000, Congress approved a modest opening of the embargo. The Trade
Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act allows cash-only sales to
Cuba of US farm products and medical supplies. The results of this modest
opening have been quite amazing. Since 2000, total sales of farm products to
Cuba have increased from virtually zero to $691m in 2008. The top US
exports by value are corn, meat and poultry, wheat and soybeans. From dead
last, Cuba is now the number six customer in Latin America for US
agricultural products. Last year, American farmers sold more to the 11.5

WFI 13
Pre Camp

60
Cuba Af

million people who live in Cuba than to the 200 million people in Brazil.
According to the US international trade commission, US farm exports
would increase another $250m if restrictions were lifted on export
financing. This should not be interpreted as a call for export-import bank
subsidies. Trade with Cuba must be entirely commercial and market driven.
Lifting the embargo should not mean that US taxpayers must now
subsidise exports to Cuba. But neither should the government stand
in the way. USITC estimates do not capture the long-term export potential
to Cuba from normalised relations. The Bahamas, Dominican Republic,
Jamaica and Guatemala spend an average of 2.8% of their GDP to buy farm
exports from the US. If Cuba spent the same share of its GDP on US farm
exports, exports could more than double the current level, to $1.5bn a year.
Advocates of the embargo argue that trading with Cuba will only put
dollars into the cofers of the Castro regime. And its true that the
government in Havana, because it controls the economy, can skim
of a large share of the remittances and tourist dollars spent in
Cuba. But of course, selling more US products to Cuba would quickly
relieve the Castro regime of those same dollars. If more US tourists
were permitted to visit Cuba, and at the same time US exports to
Cuba were further liberalised, the US economy could reclaim dollars
from the Castro regime as fast as the regime could acquire them. In
efect, the exchange would be of agricultural products for tourism
services, a kind of bread for beaches, food for fun trade
relationship. Meanwhile, the increase in Americans visiting Cuba
would dramatically increase contact between Cubans and Americans.
The unique US-Cuban relationship that flourished before Castro
could be renewed, which would increase US influence and potentially
hasten the decline of the communist regime. Congress and
President Barack Obama should act now to lift the embargo to allow
more travel and farm exports to Cuba. Expanding our freedom to
travel to, trade with and invest in Cuba would make Americans
better of and would help the Cuban people and speed the day when
they can enjoy the freedom they deserve.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

61
Cuba Af

Economy Solvency Hemispheric Relations

Key to Economy
Hemispheric co-operation is key to preventing illegal
immigration from collapsing the economy
Brookings 8 (The Brookings Institution. November. Rethinking. U.S.Latin
American Relations: A Hemispheric Partnership for a Turbulent World
http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/1124_latin_america_partnership.aspx)
Migration is a powerful and dynamic force changing economies and
societies across the Western Hemisphere. Half a million Bolivians and a quartermillion Paraguayans have migrated to Argentina. Hundreds of thousands of Colombians live in Venezuela
today, and thousands of Nicaraguans reside in Costa Rica. But by far the most important migration flows
have been from the LAC countries to the United Statesnearly 40 million people have migrated from the
LAC region to the hemispheres largest economy. At the same time, immigration has become highly
controversial in U.S. politics and has become a major source of tension in U.S. relations with some LAC

the
impact of immigration on the U.S. economy has been significant and
positive. Estimates of the net benefits to the U.S. economy put immigrants net contribution at $50
billion per year. Immigrants boost economic output by increasing the size
of the U.S. workforce and the productivity of American firm s. In the 1990s,
half the growth in the U.S. labor force came from new immigrants. Fifteen percent of the
U.S. civilian labor force is foreign born, with about 40 percent of it
coming from a LAC country. On balance, immigrants pay enough or more
in federal, state, and local taxes to ofset what they consume in
public services. Low-skilled immigrants (a category that includes most immigrants
from the LAC countries) contribute to the economy by complementing an
increasingly educated native-born workforce. In the decades ahead, the U.S.
economy will continue to demand immigrant labor. Because of
historically low U.S. birthrates and the aging of the baby boom
generation, the total number of native-born workers will grow very little between 2000 and 2020.
countries, especially Mexico, which is by far the largest migrant-sending country. On balance,

Those workers will be, on average, better educated every year and therefore less likely to accept unskilled

Immigrants and their ofspring will be crucial for filling those

jobs, keeping the U.S. labor force young and dynamic, and for
keeping the pension system in balance. For the hemispheric labor
market to function, illegal immigration must be addressed. Its
negative efects are a product of its illegal nature, not of
immigration itself. Illegality pervades the lives of undocumented workers, undermines the rule of
law in the United States, and exposes immigrants to abuse. It also harms native-born
workers and legal immigrants by making them less competitive in
some segments of the labor market, and it exacerbates social and cultural tensions
that can stigmatize law-abiding Hispanic and Latino residents and U.S. citizens. In the United States , the
chief beneficiaries of illegal immigration are lawbreaking employers
and smugglers of illicit goods and people. An Inefective Approach The
current U.S. approach to immigrationbased largely on devoting more and more
resources to border controlhas failed to achieve its objectives. The number of border
jobs.

patrol officers has more than tripled since 1996 to 18,000about 9 officers per mile of border. Line-watch
hours spent policing the U.S. border have increased annually from 2 million to more than 9 million. The
ongoing construction of a 700-mile-long, 16-foot fence along segments of the United StatesMexico border
has become the most visible symbol of this approach. About half of this fence has been completed, and its

Yet increases in funding, the

construction of the border fence, and the expansion of the U.S.
total eventual cost is estimated at $612 billion.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

62
Cuba Af

Border Patrol have not had a significant impact on illegal

immigration flows. Since 2000, the size of the illegal immigrant
population has grown by more than 40 percent; four out of five of these
immigrants come from a LAC country. As figure 4 indicates, the number of hours spent policing the border
has increased dramatically since the early 1990s. However, studies based on interviews with illegal
migrants suggest that the probability of apprehension has remained constant. Meanwhile, the fence
damages the global image of a country that has historically
pLrindewdaittcshelhfoounrsi(tmsiollpioens)immigrationpolicy. There are several reasons for this failure.

The first is that the flow of people and vehicles across the border is
so large that policing it efectively is extremely difficult, regardless
of the resources allocated to border control. Mexico is the United States third-

largest trading partner, and most of that trade crosses by land. Every day, there are 1 million legal
crossings of the United StatesMexico border. A quarter-million private vehicles and 12,000 trucks cross
the border into the United States daily, without counting the traffic running in the opposite direction. Even

the U.S. Border Patrol can only inspect a

small fraction of the vehicles and persons entering the United
States. In addition, tighter policing has made illegal border crossing
more dangerous and expensive for migrants,bu tthis has neither
deterred them from attempting to cross nor prevented them from
succeeding. Those intent on crossing the border have found new
ways to circumvent more stringent policing. Immigrants are increasingly turning to
with large budgets and modern equipment,

professional people smugglers, known as coyotes, whose fee for helping migrants cross has nearly
quadrupled since the early 1990s to more than $2,000 per person today. Hiring a coyote virtually
guarantees entry into the United States, and the promise of tenfold increases in earning power in the

More illegal
immigrants are also using legal ports of entry to enter the country
with fake documents or by making false declarations of U.S.
citizenship. According to a recent Government Accountability Office study using undercover
investigators, the probability of a successful crossing through legal ports of entry is 93 percent. The
increased costs and risks of crossing the border are having an
unintended, negative efect for the United States: They are creating
incentives for migrants to resettle permanently in the United States,
rather than to go back and forth between the two countries based
on shifts in U.S. labor demand. Meanwhile, enforcement of immigration laws inside the
United States remains a powerful enticement for would-be immigrants.

United States remains weak, primarily in the workplace. From 1986 to 2002, the U.S. government directed
60 percent of immigration enforcement funding to border controlsix times the amount allocated to
internal law enforcement. Among the OECD countries, the United States has some of the weakest
employer sanctions for hiring illegal workers, and workplace enforcement in the United States is
inconsistent and easily avoided. The failure of the U.S. Congress and federal government to agree on
comprehensive immigration reform has led state and local governments to devise their own solutions,
creating a patchwork of policies ranging from welcoming and inclusive to exclusionary and hostile. In 2007,
1,059 immigration- related bills and resolutions were introduced in state legislatures nationwide. Of these,
167 have been enacted. Many more initiatives and ordinances have been introduced at the city and county
levels. So far, the problem of illegal immigration has been treated by the U.S. authorities mainly as a law
enforcement problem tobe handled primarily, if not exclusively, by the United States. However, to

develop more efective policies, migration needs to be framed in a

wider context. Immigration is a transnational issue whose efective
management requires cooperation between migrant-sending and
-receiving countries. If migration from the LAC countries to the
United States is to be legal, humane, and responsive to the
economic needs of both the receiving and sending countries, both
sides must accept certain responsibilities.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

63
Cuba Af

Hemispheric relations is key to regional multilateral trade

Brookings 8 (The Brookings Institution. November. Rethinking. U.S.Latin

American Relations: A Hemispheric Partnership for a Turbulent World

http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/1124_latin_america_partnership.aspx)
In many ways, the core of the relationship between the United States and the LAC region is economic. U.S.
companies and individuals have nearly $200 billion invested in the region, most of it in Mexico and Brazil.

More than 18,000 U.S. companies have operations in Mexico, and a

fifth of all U.S. trade is with the LAC countries. About 25 million U.S.
residents travel to the LAC countries every year for business and
pleasure. Households in the LAC countries received about $60 billion in remittance inflows in 2007
alone, much of it from relatives living in the United States. Mexico is by far the largest recipient of
remittances in absolute terms, but in the small economies of El Salvador, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras,
Jamaica, and Nicaragua, remittances represent a major share of national income. The flows also run the

LAC countries invest heavily in the United States. In 2007 alone,

the United States received capital inflows of $120 billion from the
LAC countries. About 17 million people from these countries visit the
United States every year. The United States is the main trading partner of countries as
other way. The

diverse as Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela. Trade and financial flows have grown over time,
and in the process they have generated economic opportunities for all parties involved. Nowhere has
deepening hemispheric integration been clearer than in trade. Between 1996 and 2007, the

cumulative growth of U.S. exports to the LAC region was higher

than to all other regions and to the world as a whole,

as shown in figure 5.

Mexico remains by far the United States most important trading partner in the LAC region (accounting for
58 percent of the regions trade with the United States), but U.S. trade with other LAC countries, especially
Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Peru, has been growing at double-digit rates.

Trade with the

LAC countries benefits the United States. It gives U.S. companies

access to a $3.5 trillion market of 600 million people and access to
low-cost suppliers, which increases their competitiveness in world
markets . The LAC countries buy goods produced by skilled workers
in the United States, and these workers benefit from greater
demand for their labor and receive higher wages . Meanwhile,
shareholders in U.S. companies benefit from more competitive and
profitable firms, and American consumers enjoy access to lowerpriced goods of greater quality and variety. At the same time, trade with the
United States is critical to the economies of many LAC countries. Trade accounts for a third of Mexicos
economy, and more than 80 percent of its exports go to the United States. All the Central American,
Caribbean, and Andean countries count the United States as their single most important export market,
with between 40 and 50 percent of their total exports headed to the hemispheres largest economy.

Despite the benefits of hemispheric

trade, domestic political support for trade liberalization is
weakening in the United States. Between December 1999 and March 2007, the number of
Hemispheric Trade: Running Out of Steam?

Americans who believe that trade agreements hurt the United States grew by 16 percentage points, to 46
percent, while the marginalized from the rest of the economy for geographic, ethnic, or political reasons
are unlikely to partake in the benefits of free trade. Trade initiatives must work in tandem with targeted

With the Doha Round gridlocked and

the FTAA fading, bilateral trade deals have become the preferred
method for expanding U.S.-LAC trade. Since 2003, the United States has signed trade
development and poverty-reduction policies.

agreements with Chile, Peru, Panama, Colombia, andthrough the Central AmericaDominican Republic
United States Free Trade AgreementCosta Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala,
Honduras, and Nicaragua. The Colombia and Panama agreements are still awaiting congressional approval

all the countries in the Americas with which

the United States has signed bilateral trade agreements. The trend toward
in the United States. Figure 6 shows

bilateral free trade agreements is not a welcome development. Compared with multilateral agreements,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

64
Cuba Af

These bilateral agreements

create trade diversion, make trade rules and regulations complex
and cumbersome, draw political and diplomatic resources away from
multilateral trade negotiations, and put relatively small economies
in bilateral negotiations with the United States, where they have
limited leverage. Bilateral agreements should be seen, at best, as
very imperfect substitutes for multilateral trade liberalization.
bilateral agreements are an inferior way to promote trade.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

65
Cuba Af

Advantage Hemispheric
Relations

WFI 13
Pre Camp

66
Cuba Af

Hemispheric Relations Inherency Embargo

Makes US Look Bad
The Embargo Makes US look bad internationally
Hanson, Batten, and Ealey, 2013

[Daniel, Dayne, and Harrison, Daniel Hanson is an economics researcher at

the American Enterprise Institute. Dayne Batten is affiliated with the
University of North Carolina Department of Public Policy. Harrison Ealey is a
financial analyst, It's Time For The U.S. To End Its Senseless Embargo Of
Cuba, 1-16-13, http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspin/2013/01/16/its-time-forthe-u-s-to-end-its-senseless-embargo-of-cuba/] /Wyo-MB
At present, the U.S. is largely alone in restricting access to Cuba. The
embargo has long been a point of friction between the United States
and allies in Europe, South America, and Canada. Every year since
1992, the U.S. has been publically condemned in the United Nations
for maintaining counterproductive and worn out trade and migration
restrictions against Cuba despite the fact that nearly all 5,911 U.S.
companies nationalized during the Castro takeover have dropped their
claims.

Current stance erodes US influence in Cuba and Latin

America and undermines democracy and human rights
promotion
Huddleston and Pascual, 2010

[Vicki and Carlos, Leaders of Advisory group for policy recommendations on

Cuba, Vicki is deputy assistant secretary for Africa at the Department of
Defense and Carlos is ambassador to Mexico, Learning to Salsa: New Steps in
U.S.-Cuba Relations, Brookings Institutions Press 2010] /Wyo-MB
Engagement does not mean approval of the Cuban governments policies,
nor should it indicate a wish to control internal developments in Cuba;
legitimate changes in Cuba will only come from the actions of Cubans. If the
United States is to play a positive role in Cubas future, it must not
indulge in hostile rhetoric nor obstruct a dialogue on issues that
would advance democracy, justice, and human rights as well as our
broader national interests. Perversely, the policy of seeking to isolate
Cuba, rather than achieving its objective, has contributed to
undermining the well-being of the Cuban people and to eroding U.S.
influence in Cuba and Latin America. It has reinforced the Cuban
governments power over its citizens by increasing their dependence
on it for every aspect of their livelihood. By slowing the flow of ideas
and information, we have unwittingly helped Cuban state security
delay Cubas political and economic evolution toward a more open
and representative government. And by too tightly embracing Cubas
brave dissidents, we have provided the Cuban authorities with an
excuse to denounce their legitimate eforts to build a more open
society.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

67
Cuba Af

Hemispheric Relations Inherency Now is Key

to Boost Relations
Cuba has made moves to boost relations, it is up the U.S.
to take steps to build the relationship
Sweig, 2012
[Julia E. Sweig, Nelson and David Rockefeller Senior Fellow for Latin America
Studies and Director for Latin America Studies, Council on Foreign Relations,
2-28-12, The Frozen U.S.-Cuba Relationship, http://www.cfr.org/cuba/frozenus-cuba-relationship/p27510] /Wyo-MB
Fifty years after the United States enacted an embargo on all trade
and commercial transactions with Cuba, relations between the two
countries remain at a standstill. Julia E. Sweig, CFR's director of Latin American studies,
says the Obama administration has prioritized domestic politics over
foreign policy in its relationship with Cuba, even as Cuban President
Raul Castro has been "moving in the direction of the kind of reforms
that every administration over the last fifty years has called upon
Cuba to make." The case of American USAID contractor Alan Gross, currently serving a fifteen-year
prison sentence in Cuba (CubanTriangle) on charges of attempting to upend the regime through a U.S.authorized democracy promotion program, has also heightened tensions, she says. Meanwhile, Sweig

Cuba is strengthening ties with global powers like Brazil, as well as

as the Castro administration seeks to open up new
economic and social spaces for its citizens. We've passed the fifty-year mark of
adds,

the Catholic Church,

the breakdown of diplomatic ties between Cuba and the United States. Where do we stand now? Is
normalizing relations even remotely on the table on either side? Let me start by talking about three
geographical points on the map that are relevant to the answer. In Washington, the Obama administration,
consistent with the approach of the Bush administration, has made a political decision to subordinate
foreign policy and national interest-based decisions to domestic politics with respect to its Cuba policy.
There is a bipartisan group of members of Congress--Democrats and Republicans, House and Senate--who
represent Florida, a state where there are many swing votes that deliver the electoral votes for any
president. Those individuals not only deliver votes, but they deliver campaign finance, and generally make
a lot of noise, and that combination has persuaded the White House that reelection is more of a priority
than taking on the heavy lifting to set the United States on the path of normalization with Cuba for now.

It's not realistic to expect the United

States to undertake a series of unilateral moves toward
normalization; it needs a willing partner. I believe we have one in
Havana but have failed to read the signals. Raul Castro has now
been in office since the beginning of 2008. Raul holds the reins on both foreign policy and domestic
policy, and, domestically, the politics of implementing a fairly wide range of
economic and political and social reforms are his priority . In a deal that was
The second point is what's happening in Cuba.

coordinated with the help of the Cuban Catholic Church and Spain, he released all of the political prisoners
in Cuba. He also is taking a number of steps that imply a major rewriting of the social contract in Cuba to
shrink the size of the state and give Cuban individuals more freedom--economically, especially, but also in
terms of speech--than we've seen in the last fifty years. He has privatized the residential real estate and
car market[s], expanded much-needed agrarian reform, lifted caps on salaries, and greatly expanded
space for small businesses. He also is moving to deal with corruption and to prepare the groundwork for a

He's moving in the direction of the kind of

reforms that every administration over the last fifty years has called
upon Cuba to make, albeit under the rubric of a one-party system.
There's a broad range of cooperation--neighborhood security in the
Gulf of Mexico, as Cuba has just started drilling for oil,
counternarcotics, and natural disasters--between the two countries
that is still not happening, and that gives me the impression that the
great deal more foreign investment.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

68
Cuba Af

United States has been unwilling to take "yes" for an answer and
respond positively to steps taken by Cuba.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

69
Cuba Af

Hemispheric Relations Solvency

Engagement Solves Relations
Anti-Americanism is growing in Latin America extending
an olive branch to Cuba is necessary to re-establish our
regional soft power
Perez JD Yale Law School 2010 David America's Cuba Policy: The Way
Forward: A Policy Recommendation for the U.S. State Department Harvard
Latino Law Review lexis
Anti-Americanism has become the political chant de jour for leaders
seeking long-term as well as short-term gains in Latin American
elections. In Venezuela, the anti-American rhetoric spewed by Hugo
Chavez masks his otherwise autocratic tendencies, while countries
like Bolivia and Ecuador tilt further away from Washington, both
rhetorically and substantively. The former expelled the U.S. Ambassador in October 2008, and the latter
has refused to renew Washington's lease on an airbase traditionally used for counter-narcotics missions.

The systemic neglect for eight years during the Bush Administration
meant that political capital was never seriously spent dealing with
issues afecting the region. Because of this, President Bush was unable to get much
headway with his proposal to reform immigration, and his free trade agreement with Colombia

Recent examples of U.S.

unilateralism, disregard for international law and norms, and a
growing financial crisis, have all been seized by a new generation of
populist Latin American leaders who stoke anti-American sentiment.
The region, however, is absolutely critical to our national interest and
security. Over thirty percent of our oil comes from Latin America more than the U.S. imports from the Middle East. Additionally, over half of the
encountered significant opposition in Congress.

foreign-born population in the United States is Latin American, meaning that a significant portion of
American society is intrinsically tied to the region. n1 These immigrants, as well as their sons and
daughters, have already begun to take their place amongst America's social, cultural, and political elite.

south of America's borders, a deepening polarization is spreading

throughout the entire region. In the last few years ideological allies
in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela have written and approved new
constitutions that have consolidated the power of the executive,
while extending - or in Venezuela's case eliminating - presidential
term limits. In Venezuela the polarization has been drawn along economic lines, whereby Chavez's
Just

base of support continues to be poor Venezuelans. In Bolivia the polarization has been drawn along racial
lines: the preamble to the new Bolivian constitution, approved in January 2009, makes reference to the
"disastrous colonial times," a moment in history that Bolivians of Andean-descent particularly lament.
Those regions in Bolivia with the most people of European or mixed descent have consistently voted for
increased provincial autonomy and against the constitutional changes proposed by President Morales.
Perhaps due to its sweeping changes, the new Constitution was rejected by four of Bolivia's nine provinces.
n2 Like Bolivia, Latin America is still searching for its identity.
[*191] Traditionally the U.S. has projected its influence by using
varying combinations of hard and soft power. It has been a long time
since the United States last sponsored or supported military action in
Latin America, and although highly context-dependent, it is very likely that Latin
American citizens and their governments would view any overt
display of American hard power in the region negatively. n3 One can only
imagine the fodder an American military excursion into Latin America would provide for a leader like Hugo
Chavez of Venezuela, or Evo Morales of Bolivia.

Soft power, on the other hand, can win over

WFI 13
Pre Camp

70
Cuba Af

people and governments without resorting to coercion, but is limited by

other factors.

The key to soft power is not simply a strong military, though having one
helps, but rather an enduring sense of legitimacy that can then be
projected across the globe to advance particular policies. The key to
this legitimacy is a good image and a reputation as a responsible
actor on the global and regional stage. A good reputation and image
can go a long way toward generating goodwill, which ultimately will
help the U.S. when it tries to sell unpopular ideas and reforms in the
region. n4
In order to efectively employ soft power in Latin America, the U.S.
must repair its image by going on a diplomatic ofensive and
reminding, not just Latin America's leaders, but also the Latin
American people, of the important relationship between the U.S. and
Latin America. Many of the problems facing Latin America today
cannot be addressed in the absence of U.S. leadership and
cooperation. Working with other nations to address these challenges
is the best way to shore up legitimacy, earn respect, and repair
America's image. Although this proposal focuses heavily on Cuba, every country in Latin America
is a potential friend. Washington will have to not only strengthen its
existing relationships in the region, but also win over new allies,
who look to us for "ideas and solutions, not lectures." n5
When analyzing ecosystems, environmental scientists seek out "keystone species." These are organisms
that, despite their small size, function as lynchpins for, or barometers of, the entire system's stability .

Cuba, despite its size and isolation, is a keystone nation in Latin America,
having disproportionately dominated Washington's policy toward the
region for decades. n6 As a result of its continuing tensions with
Havana, America's reputation [*192] in the region has sufered, as has
its ability to deal with other countries. n7 For fifty years, Latin American
governments that hoped to endear themselves to the U.S. had to
pass the Cuba "litmus test." But now the tables have turned, and the
Obama Administration, if it wants to repair America's image in the
region, will have to pass a Cuba litmus test of its own. n8 In short,
America must once again be admired if we are going to expect other
countries to follow our example. To that end, warming relations with
Cuba would have a reverberating efect throughout Latin America,
and would go a long way toward creating goodwill.

The plan leads to broader cooperation and influence in the

region and globally
Perez JD Yale Law School 2010 David America's Cuba Policy: The Way
Forward: A Policy Recommendation for the U.S. State Department Harvard
Latino Law Review lexis
[*195] Third, the Obama Administration ignores Latin America at its own
peril. Latin America's importance to the United States is growing by the
day, and cannot be overstated. While the issue of U.S.-Cuba
relations is obviously of smaller import than many other issues
currently afecting the world (i.e., the ailing economy, climate change, proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction), addressing it would also involve correspondingly
less efort than those issues, but could potentially lead to a

WFI 13
Pre Camp

71
Cuba Af

disproportionately high return by making regional cooperation more

likely. n20 In order to confront any of the major world issues facing
the United States, Washington must find a way to cooperate with its
neighbors, who generally view U.S. policy toward Cuba as the most
glaring symbol of its historic inability to constructively engage the
region. These three reasons combine for a perfect storm: to the extent that a healthy
U.S.-Cuban relationship would mean a healthier U.S.-Latin America
relationship, the former should be pursued with an unprecedented
vigor, one that has been absent for the last fifty years.
Aside from the strategic importance of this issue, addressing these concerns might
also prevent more serious problems in the future. Although the chances of a
post-Castro Cuba becoming a failed state are slim, the threat is nevertheless real. If the state
were to collapse, the island could plunge into civil war, face a
humanitarian crisis, become a major drug trafficking center,
experience a massive migration to Florida, or endure a combination
of each. However, a new and comprehensive policy toward Cuba can
help prevent these nightmare scenarios from materializing.
There is no doubt that America's diminished image in Latin America
means that it will face additional difficulty when trying to accomplish
its regional goals. n21 To address the issues confronting the United States
vis-a-vis Latin America (i.e., drugs, the environment, trade, labor
and human rights), Washington must restore its heavily damaged
image and regain its place as the region's trendsetter and leader.
Resolving America's "Cuba problem" is a low-cost/high-reward strategy that would
inject new energy and credibility into America's image . The Eight
Recommendations found in this proposal are suggestions that the Obama Administration should consider
as it moves to reengage Latin America. Part of America's greatness is its ability to inspire practical
solutions in people. Any new U.S.-Cuban policy should embrace not only America's uncanny ability to
reinvent itself, but also the pragmatism that has made America so great to begin with.

Engagement solves Anti-Americanism and is key to

leadership on human rights and democracy promotion and
is key to a new bilateral relationship
Huddleston and Pascual, 2010
[Vicki and Carlos, Leaders of Advisory group for policy recommendations on
Cuba, Vicki is deputy assistant secretary for Africa at the Department of
Defense and Carlos is ambassador to Mexico, Learning to Salsa: New Steps in
U.S.-Cuba Relations, Brookings Institutions Press 2010] /Wyo-MB
The advisory group of the Brookings Institution project U.S. Policy
toward a Cuba in Transition came to the unanimous conclusion that
President Barack Obama should commit to a long-term process of
critical and constructive engagement at all levels, including with the
Cuban government. We believe that only through engagement can the
president put into place a strategic vision that would permit the
United States to protect its interests and advance the desire we
share with the hemisphere to help the Cuban people become agents
for peaceful change from within the island. A decision by the
president to engage the Cuban government would not reflect
acceptance of its human rights abuses or approval of its conduct.
Instead, it would prove a realistic evaluation and recognition of the extent
to which the Cuban government controls Cuba essential to the

WFI 13
Pre Camp

72
Cuba Af

implementation of a new policy that would permit us to work with

the region, enhance our influence with the Cuban government, and
seek to help Cubas citizens expand the political space they need to
influence their future. Engagement should serve to enhance personal
contacts between Cuban and U.S. citizens and permanent residents,
diminish Cubas attraction as a rallying point for anti-American
sentiment, and burnish our standing in the region and the wider
international community. If we engage, the Cuban government will
no longer be able to use the U.S. threat as a credible excuse for
human rights abuses and restrictions on free speech, assembly,
travel, and economic opportunity. This in turn would encourage the
international community to hold the Cuban government to the same
standards of democracy, rights, and freedoms that it expects from
other governments around the world. The Cuban hierarchy will not
undertake openings or respond to pressure from the international community
or the United States if it considers that doing so would jeopardize its
continued existence. The key to a new dynamic in our relationship is to
embark on a course of a series of strategic actions that aims to
establish a bilateral relationship and put the United States on the
playing field to counter our hitherto self-imposed role of critical
observer. Our priority should be to serve U.S. interests and values in
the confidence that if we do so wisely and efectively, Cubans in the
long run will gain as well.

Engagement with Cuba is key to United States diplomatic

leadership
Huddleston and Pascual, 2010
[Vicki and Carlos, Leaders of Advisory group for policy recommendations on
Cuba, Vicki is deputy assistant secretary for Africa at the Department of
Defense and Carlos is ambassador to Mexico, Learning to Salsa: New Steps in
U.S.-Cuba Relations, Brookings Institutions Press 2010] /Wyo-MB
For the United States, reorienting its approach to Cuba by working with
other hemispheric actors and the Cuban government will be
essential to creating wider and more meaningful capacity to
leverage change in Cuba. A strategy that develops a common
perspective with our partners will be most likely to encourage
Cubas leaders to undertake measures that will allow Cuba to begin
an evolution toward democracy, respect for human rights, and
transparent and equitable development. In pursuing such a shift in
strategy, the United States also wins diplomatically, both by
eliminating a policy of isolation that has been perhaps the most
acrimonious issue is U.S. relations with the rest of the hemisphere
and by depriving Cuba of the argument that its failures are due to
U.S. policies rather than to its own shortcomings.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

73
Cuba Af

Maintaining the embargo is the hight of US hypocrisywe

should abandon this policy for engagement to align the
United States stance toward cuba with the rest of the
world
Wilkins, 2013
[Brett, founder and editor of MoralLowGround.com, is an author and social
justice advocate based in San Francisco, California, US Cuba Embargo is
Height of Hypocrisy, 4-17-13, http://morallowground.com/2013/04/17/uscuba-embargo-is-height-of-hypocrisy/] /Wyo-MB
The US economic embargo of Cuba, which is opposed by just about
every nation on earth, is more than an outdated Cold War relic. It is
the very height of hypocrisy. The embargo has been in the news lately
after the entertainment worlds leading power couple, Jay-Z and Beyonc,
visited Cuba earlier this month. Although their trip was approved by the US
government as an educational, person-to-person exchange, some
conservative lawmakers howled holy hell over what they perceived as an
expression of support for the Castro dictatorship. Cuban-American Sen. Marco
Rubio (R-FL) called the couple hypocritical. Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, also a
Cuban-American, invoked the sufering of the Cuban people under
communist dictatorship in blasting their trip to the island. This, the same RosLehtinen who unabashedly supports some of the hemispheres most
notorious and murderous terrorists, men who have inflicted much death and
sufering upon the Cuban people. To any educated observer it is immediately
obvious that the real hypocrites are not Jay-Z and Beyonc, but rather the
US leaders and lawmakers who have brought enormous death and
sufering to a nation that has not posed any threat whatsoever to
the United States in half a century. On the contrary, the US has been
waging a relentless campaign of terrorism and economic
strangulation against Cuba ever since John F. Kennedy declared his
intention to unleash the terrors of the earth upon Cuba more than
50 years ago. There was the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion, support
for Miami-based Cuban exile terrorists who killed hundreds, if not
thousands, of innocent civilians, possible chemical and biological
attacks against Cuban agriculture, and Operation Mongoose a CIA
plan under which dozens of failed assassination attempts against
Fidel Castro were undertaken. There was even a plan to carry out
airplane hijackings and terror bombings in American cities and
blame them on Cuba in order to provoke a war. Fortunately, the falseflag operation known as Operation Northwoods never came to fruition. And
what retaliation did Cuba take against all this US provocation?
Absolutely none. Perhaps thats part of the reason why nearly every
nation on earth has repeatedly voted to condemn the US embargo
and call for its immediate lifting. The UN recently voted 188-3 to
condemn the absurd embargo. The United States, Israel and the tiny, USdependent island nation of Palau (population 20,000) were the only countries
which voted against the measure. As for claims that Cuba is run by a
monstrously brutal communist dictatorship, well, lets just say that
the US supports far worse regimes around the world. Saudi Arabia,
Equatorial Guinea, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iraq and Bahrain are

WFI 13
Pre Camp

74
Cuba Af

all far worse human rights violators than Cuba. Israel, which
receives $3 billion in annual US military aid, is the only nation on
earth which simultaneously practices occupation, apartheid,
colonization and ethnic cleansing. Meanwhile, things are slowly but
inexorably changing in Havana. There are less than 100 political
prisoners in Cuba. There have been no executions in many years.
Economic reforms abound. And for the first time in generations,
Cubans are free to travel abroad without obtaining exit visas. Yes,
the Castro regime is the only totalitarian government left in the Americas.
But the regimes days are almost certainly numbered and the US is
supremely hypocritical in selectively singling out Cuba for collective
punishment when Washington does business with far worse
dictators even communists. As Jay-Z rapped in his recently-released Open
Letter: Im in Cuba, I love Cubans/This communist talk is so confusing/When
its from China, the very mic Im using. US leaders really ought to be
careful when pointing the finger at Cuba. After all, no other nation
on the face of the earth has killed more innocent civilians in more
countries outside its own borders since the end of WWII than the
United States. No other nation even comes close. US atrocities make
worldwide headlines on almost a daily basis witness yesterdays release of a
bipartisan task force study of American torture. If you surveyed all the
worlds people on which country, Cuba or the United States, is more
worthy of censure, Id bet the house that at least 90 percent of
humanity would choose the latter. The absurdly hypocritical
embargo against the peaceful people of Cuba must end. It should
have ended decades ago. The US has proven it can bury the hatchet
and embrace nations that have actually done great damage to it (see
Germany and Japan). Cuba has repeatedly expressed and
demonstrated its willingness to open a new chapter in the US-Cuban
relationship. Only Washington, influenced by a tiny yet powerfully
connected clique of Cuban-Americans, stands in the way of open,
peaceful relations. Only Washington can restore sanity. The time for
action is now.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

75
Cuba Af

Hemispheric Relations Impact Laundry List

Relations with Cuba solve a host of impacts
environment, disease, and organized crime
Huddleston and Pascual, 2010

[Vicki and Carlos, Leaders of Advisory group for policy recommendations on

Cuba, Vicki is deputy assistant secretary for Africa at the Department of
Defense and Carlos is ambassador to Mexico, Learning to Salsa: New Steps in
U.S.-Cuba Relations, Brookings Institutions Press 2010] /Wyo-MB
Finally, it is striking that debates on policy within the United States and at
times with other governments have been more acrimonious than exchanges
among professionals, including the military, when they have had the
opportunity to engage directly. The United States, Cuba, and others in
the hemisphere have a common interest in working together on
issues that impact the hemisphere such as humanitarian
emergencies, improving the environment, preventing disease, and
dealing with organized crime. The link between organized crime and
drugs has become pernicious in the hemisphere, afecting every
country on the supply or demand side of the chain or on transit
routes; weaknesses at any point in the chain can provide a safe
haven for criminals. Depoliticizing cooperation on such issues is a
practical necessity for all countries; practical and professional
cooperation in these areas can then set the foundations for tougher
discussions on politics.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

76
Cuba Af

Advantage Oil Spills

WFI 13
Pre Camp

77
Cuba Af

Oil Spills Inherency Spills Likely Now

Cuba is on the verge of deepwater oil drilling making an
a short-term environmental catastrophe a likelyhood
Mahony 10 (Melisa, "An ofshore Cuban oil crisis," Smartplanet, October 1,

http://www.smartplanet.com/business/blog/intelligent-energy/a-ofshorecuban-oil-crisis/2944/)
Cuba could be drilling for oil of its shores for the first time, as soon
as next year. Spanish company Repsol plans to drill exploratory wells
in waters 5,600 feet deep about 22 miles of Havana. Not surprisingly,
American companiesstill awaiting the BP blowout-inspired ban on ofshore drilling to lift on November 30
want in. But the 1960s trade embargo with the communist state wont allow it. According to McClatchy
Newspapers, any ship or rig comprised of more than 10 percent U.S. parts cant operate in Cuba. (Repsol
will use an Italian rig equipped with an American-made blowout preventer only.) In the face of the embargo

companies say they at least want to be able

to help. You know, just in case Cuba experiences an ofshore oil
incident similar to our Gulf disaster. As rookies, Cuba lacks
submersible robots, drilling platforms and other forms of deepwater
clean-up capacity. Even with the experience and this technology (and some golf balls?), the U.S.
and possibly in the hopes of easing it,

took about 5 months to plug BPs well. And the area where Repsol will be drilling is about 60 miles from the

Should a spill occur there, marine scientists have been

reported estimating that oil could reach Florida within 3 days, and
possibly get swept into the Gulf Stream. The New York Times: The prospect of an
Florida Keys.

accident is emboldening American drilling companies, backed by some critics of the embargo, to seek
permission from the United States government to participate in Cubas nascent industry, even if only to
protect against an accident. [....] Any opening could provide a convenient wedge for big American oil
companies that have quietly lobbied Congress for years to allow them to bid for oil and natural gas
deposits in waters of Cuba. Representatives of Exxon Mobil and Valero Energy attended an energy
conference on Cuba in Mexico City in 2006, where they met Cuban oil officials. Cuba, like many Caribbean
islands, currently relies heavily on oil imports from Venezuela. After Aprils Gulf spill, the government office
that enforces foreign economic sanctions said licenses for American companies to aid Cubas ofshore
eforts could be granted in emergency situations. To put it mildly, the sentiments surrounding this issue
ofshore drilling, communism, environment, employment, economic sanctions, humanitarian efortsrun

Cuba needs a rapid response spill plan

before any drilling commences.
deep. But whatever the political implications,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

78
Cuba Af

Oil Spills Solvency Relations Solve

Environment
Even if no oil spill occurs normalizing relations with Cuba
is key to encouraging global environmental sustainability
Council on Hemispheric Afairs 9
("The US and Cuba: an Environmental Duo," Scoop World, June 15,
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0906/S00198.htm)
Cubas abundant natural resources need to be protected with
heightened vigilance Lifting the trade embargo would open up the
possibility for a constructive partnership between Cuba and the U.S.
by developing compatible and sustainable environmental policies
With the support of the U.S., Cuba could become a model for
sustainable preservation and environmental protection on a global
scale Through accidents of geography and history, Cuba is a priceless ecological
resource. The United States should capitalize on its proximity to this
resource-rich island nation by Smoving to normalize relations and
establishing a framework for environmental cooperation and joint initiatives
throughout the Americas. Cuba is the most biologically diverse of all the
Caribbean Islands. Since it lies just 90 miles south of the Florida
Keys, where the Atlantic, the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico
intersect, the U.S. could play a key role in environmental conservation as well as the region in
general. However, when it comes to environmental preservation, the Obama administration is obstructing
progress and hindering any meaningful cooperation with its current U.S.- Cuba policy. Climate change and

President
Obama is sincerely committed to environmental sustainability, he
must forge international partnerships to implement this objective.
Where better to begin than in the U.S.s own backyard, where Cuba
has a huge presence. Only then can Cuba and the United States
move forward to find joint solutions to environmental challenges.
environmental degradation are two of the most pressing contemporary issues. If

Environmental Riches and Implications Cubas glittering white sand beaches, extensive coral reefs,
endemic fauna and diverse populations of fish compose the Caribbeans most biologically diverse island.
Based on a per hectare sampling when compared to the U.S. plus Canada ,

Cuba has 12 times

more mammal species, 29 times as many amphibian and reptile
species, 39 times more bird species, and 27 times as many vascular
plant species. Equally important, adjacent ocean currents and the island
nations close proximity, carry fish larvae into U.S. waters, making
protection of Cubas coastal ecosystems vital to replenishing the
U.S.s ailing fisheries. Therefore, preserving the marine resources of
Cuba is critical to the economic health of North Americas Atlantic coastal
communities. The U.S. and Cuba also share an ancient deepwater coral system that stretches up to North
Carolina. The islands 4,200 islets and keys support important commercial reef fish species such as
snapper and grouper as well as other marine life including sea turtles, dolphins and manatees in both

Fifty percent of its flora and 41 percent of its fauna are

endemic, signifying the importance of protecting the islands
resources in order to safeguard the paradisiacal vision that Christopher Columbus
countries.

observed when landing on the island in 1492. Oro Negro and Dinero The recent discovery of oil and natural
gas reserves in the Florida straits in Cuban waters has attracted foreign oil exploration from China and
India, both eager to begin extraction. Ofshore oil and gas development could threaten Cubas and

Cuba and the U.S. can develop policies to

combat the negative results coming from the exploitation of these
Floridas environmental riches. Together,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

79
Cuba Af

resources. The increased extraction and refining of oil in Cuba could

have detrimental efects on the environment. Ofshore drilling is likely to increase
with the discovery of petroleum deposits in the Bay of Crdenas and related areas. Excavation
increases the possibility of oil spills, which would in turn destroy the
surrounding ecosystem, including fisheries and coral reef
formations. The amount of pollutants released into the air from refining crude oil and the amount of
wayward oil residuals would also increase with drilling and extraction. Those conversant with the very
sensitive habitat issues are calling for immediate consultations aimed at anticipating what should be done.
However the U.S.s enormous oil usage and its development requirements will cultivate economic growth

Washington must work with Cuba to create an ecological

protection plan not only to establish an environmentally friendly
public image, but to make it a reality as well. Degradation of the environment will
on the island.

deprive Cuba, in the long run, of one of its most important sources of present and future revenue: tourism.
Consequently, it is in the mutual interests of the U.S. and Cuba to develop a cooperative relationship that
will foster tourism and growth in a sustainable manner. Sustainability through Collaboration In many parts
of the country communism has inadequately acted as a seal to preserve elements of Cubas past as the
centralized government prohibited private development by not giving special permission. A number of
tourist resorts already dot the island, but Cuba has been largely exempt from mass tourist exploitation due
to frozen relations with the U.S. Although the island remains underdeveloped, Fidel Castro has used his
unchecked power to back policies, which have been heedless to environmental considerations, thus
damaging some of the islands pristine ecosystem that once defined the island. Roughly the size of

and if preservation and

conservation measures are planned and carried out in a cognizant
manner, it could become a paradigm for sustainable development at
the global level. The Obama administrations recent easing of travel restrictions on Cuban
Pennsylvania, Cuba is the largest Caribbean island,

Americans visiting relatives on the island could be of immense importance not only to Cuban families, but
also to the preservation of Cubas unique and increasingly threatened coastal and marine environments.
Such a concession on Washingtons part would mark a small, but still significant stride in U.S.-Cuba
relations, yet the travel restrictions still remain inherently discriminatory. The preposterous regulations that
allow only a certain category of Americans into Cuba signify only a meager shift in U.S. policy towards
Cuba. The 50-year-old U.S. embargo against the island has resoundingly failed to achieve its purpose.

Obamas modifications fall short of what it will take to reestablish a

constructive U.S.-Cuba relationship. Cubas tropical forests, soils, and maritime areas
have sufered degradation as a result of harmful policies stemming from a Soviet-style economic system.
Cubas economy could be reinvigorated through expanded tourism, development initiatives and an
expansion of commodity exports, including sugarcane for ethanol. U.S. policy toward Cuba should
encourage environmental factors, thereby strengthening U.S. credibility throughout the hemisphere. A n

environmental partnership between the U.S. and Cuba is not only

possible, but could result in development models that could serve as
an example for environmental strategies throughout the Americas.
The U.S. has the economic resources necessary to aid Cuba in
developing efective policy, while the island provides the space
where sustainable systems can be implemented initially instead of
being applied after the fact. Cubas extreme lack of development
provides an unspoiled arena for the execution of exemplary
sustainable environmental protection practices. Waste Not, Want Not Although

the government of Cuba has established state-based agencies to develop sustainable environmental
practices, the islands resources are left to be used at the governments discretion. It is estimated that
throughout Cuba, about 113.5 billion gallons of water contaminated with agricultural, industrial and urban
wastes are dumped into the sea annually and more than 3.27 billion gallons find their way into its rivers.
As direct dumping of untreated industrial waste into rivers, aquifers, and the sea is the norm, Cuban
scientists estimate that this volume of industrial liquid waste pollutes roughly 486 gallons of clean water
per year. The majority of this contamination stems from four industries, all state owned and operated,
nickel excavation, sugar refineries, oil refineries, and rice farms. A 1994 Cuban press release disclosed that
the Soto Alba nickel plant on the Moa Bay dumped more than 3.17 billion gallons of untreated liquid waste
into the sea every day. The waste contained 72 tons of aluminum, 48 tons of chromium, 15 tons of
magnesium, and 30 tons of sulfuric acid. By way of comparison, the treatment standards for wastewater in
the U.S. limit the concentration of chromium to a maximum of 0.32 milligrams per liter, 12 times less than
the daily dumping into the Moa Bay by only one of the three nickel plants operating in the area. In the
sugar industry, more than 15.85 billion gallons of liquid waste are dumped into caves by the 151 operating

WFI 13
Pre Camp

80
Cuba Af

sugar mills on the island creating the most enduring environmental problem. These alarming figures
highlight the precipitous position of Cubas environment. While Cuban citizens increasingly are aware of
the importance of environmental conservation, the government continues to exploit the islands resources
for state use without hindrance of being environmentally sound. Environmentalists maintain that the
Cuban government must take responsibility for enforcing the environmental laws it has enacted and
agreements it has signed. For Cubans and foreigners alike, the beaches of Cuba constitute the principle
tourist attraction in the country, but even these have not escaped wasteful government exploitation. The
famous beaches east of Havana have been the victims of sand removal for use by the Cuban government
in the construction industry. In addition to coastal destruction, like many of its Caribbean neighbors, Cuba
faces deforestation, over-cultivation of land and compaction of soils due to the use of heavy farm
machinery and strip mining. These practices have resulted in high salinity in soils and heavy land erosion.
Furthermore, poor water quality in freshwater streams has afected the wildlife habitat, which is in turn
influenced by runof from agricultural practices, erosion due to deforestation, and sedimentation of
freshwater streams. Cuba must act in a responsible manner to stop environmental degradation and
preserve its tourist industry as an early step to salvage its inert economy. Beginning Concerns The
environmental degradation that began during the colonial era has transcended time as a result of Castros
political and economic paradigm. Only in the last 40 years, with the development of the Commission for
the Protection of the Environment and the Conservation of Natural Resources (COMARNA), has Cuba begun
to address growing environmental concerns. COMARNA consolidated all of the agencies with environmental
responsibilities, as a step towards giving them the power to influence all environmental issues. Although
COMARNA was all-inclusive, it lacked independent authority, so its activities achieved few tangible results.
The sad fact was that the centralized agency only succeeded in aiding the state in squandering resources.
In reality, establishing the agency was a modest concession to ease environmental concerns, but the truth
lingered that Cubas wealth of natural resources remained under the auspices of the government.
COMARNA acknowledged the appeals for conservation by the international community, yet it allowed for
the misuse of natural resources by the State. By way of example, the centralized Cuban agency built
thousands of miles of roads for the development of non-existent state agricultural enterprises and dams
where there was hardly any water to contain. In 1981, Cuba enacted Law 33 in an attempt to legitimize
their environmental laws and regulations, yet Law 33 played only a miniscule role in guiding the extraction
of natural resources and the conservation of ecological life on the island. Lauded as a law ahead of its
time, Law 33 purportedly covers all the regulations concerning the environment and the protection and use
of Cuban national resources, even though it produced few results. The statute includes a section
comparing the wise use of natural resources by communist countries versus the indiscriminate use of
natural resources by the capitalistic world. In this regard, the document is more a piece of political
propaganda than a law meant to be rigorously enforced. Moreover it palls in comparison to international
environmental protection guidelines and has relatively limited significance within the country since the
Cuban government is responsible for the operation of the bulk of the industries and is therefore the
principal polluter and consumer of natural resources. Thus Law 33 exonerates the Cuban government from
enforcing stricter conservation standards by making a system that looks efficient, but in reality may not be
so. A closer analysis on Law 33 exposes its inherent lack of efficacy and applicability. Attempts to Move
Forward In 1994, Cuba developed the Ministry of Science, Technology and the Environment (CITMA) in
order to absorb the tasks of the unproductive COMARNA. CITMA attempts to steer the implementation of
environmental policy, the rational use of natural resources, and the adoption of sustainable development
programs. Law 81 developed out of the necessity to give the Ministry a more sharply defined role in the
government by replacing the outdated Law 33. Law 81, the Law of the Environment, was enacted in 1997
and presents a comprehensive framework law that covers all aspects of the environment ranging from air,
water and waste, to historic preservation and coastal zone management. Although it details inspections
and an enforcement plan, the law is ultimately inefective due to its overarching nature, which makes it
difficult to enforce. Law 81 may replace a necessary revision of Law 33; however, it remains vague in its
enforcement procedures. For example, Law 81, Article 81 states that national resources will be used in
accordance with the provisions that their rational use will be assured, for which their quantitative and
qualitative continuity will be preserved, recycling and recovery systems will be developed, and the
ecosystems to which they belong safeguarded. This portion of the provision elucidates the ambiguous
nature of the law, as it continues to delineate objectives without coming up with specific implementation
strategies. In 1997, the Earth Summit, a conference sponsored by the United Nations aimed at aiding
governments in rethinking economic development and finding ways to halt the destruction of irreplaceable
natural resources and pollution of the planet was held in New York. At the Summit, Cuban officials were
refreshingly blunt in acknowledging the environmental degradation present on their island. In a pamphlet
distributed at the conference, the Havana government stated that there have been mistakes and
shortcomings, due mainly to insufficient environmental awareness, knowledge and education, the lack of a
higher management demand, limited introduction and generalization of scientific and technological
achievements, as well as the still insufficient incorporation of environmental dimensions in its policies. The
authorities also pointed to the insufficient development plans and programs and the absence of a
sufficiently integrative and coherent judicial system, to enforce environmental regulations. After the Earth
Summit, Cuba designed and implemented a variety of programs, administrative structures, and public
awareness initiatives to promote sound environmental management and sustainable development.
Although the conference spurred motivation in environmental matters, Cuba still lacked the economic
resources needed to support its share of environmental protection responsibilities due to the loss of its
financial ties with the former Soviet Union. The Earth Summit came after the fall of the Soviet Union and

WFI 13
Pre Camp

81
Cuba Af

the tightening of the U.S. blockade against Cuba in 1992, which resulted in a 35% retrenchment of the
Cuban GDP. The Special Period, referring to the cut of of economic subsidies that had regularly come from
the former Soviet Union, witnessed a decrease in many environmentally damaging activities both by
choice and by necessity. The end of aid from the Russia also resulted in many decisions aimed at
resuscitating the Cuban economy. The economic crisis increased pressure to sacrifice environmental
protection for economic output. Although development slowed due to economic concerns, the islands
forests were particularly overworked for firewood and finished wood exports. However, the crisis also
provided the impetus for pursuing sustainable development strategies. The principle motivating such
change has been a realization that if Cuba does not preserve its environment, it will, at the very least, lose
its attraction to tourists. Diverging Views Unlike the U.S., which still has never ratified the Kyoto Protocol,
Cuba signed the document in 1997, which calls for the stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in
the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the global climate system. This
legally binding international agreement attempts to tackle the issue of global warming and the reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions. The U.S., although a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, has neither ratified nor
withdrawn from the Protocol. The signature alone is merely symbolic, as the Kyoto Protocol is non-binding
on the United States unless ratified. Although in 2005 the United States was the largest per capita emitter
of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, it experienced only a modest decline of 2.8 percent from

This decline demonstrates that the U.S. has the framework

to reverse Cubas substandard environmental track record. By aiding
Havana, Washington would be able to brand itself as an active
conservationist. Such a label would enable the U.S. to create a
valuable ecological public image in the international arena. The
2007 to 2008.

developmental assistance and economic growth potential that might stem from a U.S.-Cuba partnership
might aid in developing enforceable implementation strategies. Even though Cubas written regulations
characteristically lack feasible, implementable standards. Cuban laws, currently in efect, do provide a
foundation for greater conservation activity in the future. The Cuban government does show an interest in
encouraging sustainable development initiatives in the future, yet its laws are all based on maintaining a
centralized government featuring a command economy. For example, CITMA appears to be trying to afect
change, but many aspects of Cubas bureaucracy are rooted in the past and it remains difficult to update
the ways of an outdated administrative substructure. If the embargo is lifted without a robust partnership
and plans for environmental sustainability, the invasion of U.S. consumerism may seriously damage the
island. Fear of Cancunization Many Cuba well-wishers fear if President Obama lifts the trade embargo,
the invasion of raw capitalism could destroy Cubas relatively pristine environment. Although the Cuban
government points to its environmental laws and the government agency which was established to
develop a sustainable environmental policy, these measures have done little up to now to afect
substantial change. In several distinct sectors, Cuba seems to remain unprepared for the lifting of the
embargo and the island inevitably could face a flood of investors from the United States and elsewhere,
eager to exploit the beautiful landscapes of the island, at great cost and risk. After years of relying on
government subsidies and protectionism, this rapid growth could generate irreparable shock waves
through the economy. Oliver Houck, a professor at Tulane University who aided the Cuban government in
writing its environmental protection provisions, said an invasion of U.S. consumerism, a U.S.-dominated
future, could roll over it (Cuba) like a bulldozer, when the embargo ends. The wider Caribbean region has
experienced water contamination, mangrove destruction and sewage problems due to large quantities of
tourists and inadequate plumbing. Therefore, U.S. tourism regulations need to be in place in order to
protect the precious ecosystem of the island and prohibit over development. Collaboration between the
U.S. and Cuba would be mutually beneficial, as the U.S. could use Cuba as a laboratory of sustainable
development and U.S. tourism would stimulate Cubas stagnant economy, if its negative impact could be
controlled. Both countries must agree upon a mutual plan for development. The Environmental Defense
Fund (EDF) has conducted research in Cuba since 2000, working with Cuban partners on scientific
investigations and strategies for protecting coastal and marine resources. Operating under a special
license from the United States government, EDF experts are collaborating with Cuban scientists on
research projects aimed at ensuring that if Cuba taps ofshore oil and gas reserves, it will be done in an
environmentally concious way. The US should establish more partnerships like these as President Obama
has the legal authority to institute far-reaching cooperation with Cuba on joint marine environmental
projects. These partnerships should be implemented as the first step in creating an elaborate alliance for
environmental protection between the two countries. If the embargo is lifted, symbols of meretricious
American capitalism are likely to invade the once relatively isolated island. Opinion columnist Cynthia
Tucker has commented on such matters: Mickey Mouse is sure to arrive, bringing with him the aptly
predicted full frontal assault of American culture and consumer goods, suggesting that if Obama lifts the
embargo, a functioning system of environmental protection supported by both the U.S. and the Cuban
public must be present for the island to be protected. It is Cubas lack of development that makes the
island attractive to tourists and although tourism boosts the economy, it also could have detrimental
efects on the environment. If the embargo is lifted, strict development restrictions need to be in place in
order to prevent further environmental exploitation. Currently, without a severe shift in enforcement of
environmental laws and the formation of a hard-working U.S.-Cuba partnership, the Caribbeans most
biodiverse island will continue to be damaged.

The key to a new dynamic in the U.S.-

WFI 13
Pre Camp

82
Cuba Af

Cuba relationship might be to embark on a series of strategic actions

that aim to establish a bilateral relationship for sustainable
development and associated activities based on mutual respect and
the autonomy of each countrys sovereignty and traditions.

Relations set a precedent for environmental co-operation

globally
Gage 10
(Julienne, "Cuban, US Scientists Work Toward a Better Gulf," Discovery News,
October 15, http://news.discovery.com/earth/cuba-united-states-gulfscience.html)
* Because of a lack of tourism prompted by the U.S.-Cuba trade embargo, reefs in Cuba are much less

* The environment has ofered a

promising source of study for scientists. * The United States and
Cuba cut of diplomatic relations and most travel 50 years ago,
which makes such collaboration tricky. Since 1962, the United States' embargo
damaged than their Florida counterparts.

against communist Cuba has drastically limited travel and collaboration with the island. Click to enlarge
this image. With 3,000 monitors floating through the world's oceans at once, scientists are getting a flood
of information about our seas. Discovery News' James Williams dives into the story. Its been five decades
since the United States cut of ties to communist Cuba, ultimately limiting communication, trade, and
travel to some research and humanitarian assistance. Ironically, that isolation helped to protect the
islands pristine ocean ecosystem, making it an ideal place for scientists to study marine restoration and
conservation. Under exemptions to the 1962 U.S. embargo against Cuba, David Guggenheim, a Senior
Fellow at Washington, D.C.s Ocean Foundation, has made more than 50 trips there since 2000. He says
Floridas reefs once mirrored Cubas, but were damaged by decades of sediment and fertilizer from largescale construction and farming. If

Columbus were a scuba diver, hed still

recognize this beautiful place . its the way an ecosystem should
look, Guggenheim said. The islands tourism was scarce between the 1959 revolution that brought

Fidel Castro to power and the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, Cubas main economic backer. To save
itself from financial ruin, Cuba built it up, luring Europeans hungry for tropical vacations. Still, that industry

These unique
circumstances allow scientists from across the globe a chance to
explore more cohesive international marine policies and practices , and
nowhere is that more evident than in the Gulf of Mexico. For example, Mexican and U.S.
scientists are examining how Cuban corals could be transplanted to
their diminished coasts. Those reefs ofer vital habitat to fish and
sea turtles roaming freely through Gulf waters. The Obama administration has
is small compared to what it would be if American tourists could visit.

increased U.S. visas to Cuban researchers, but scientists on both shores say the embargo still hinders the
extent of collaboration. Half the efort is figuring out licensing and (political) sensitivities, said Frank
Muller-Karger, an oceangrapher at University of South Floridas College of Marine Science in Tampa. U.S.
law wont allow American researchers to bring in high-tech equipment because the U.S. government
contends it could be used for terrorism. American scientists can hire local Cubans for purposes of their

Current eforts underscore the potential

for scientific advancement, especially in light of the historic Gulf oil spill. Last month, about
visit, but not for ongoing investigations.

60 Cuban, Mexican, and American scientists gathered for the fourth annual Trinational Initiative at the
MOTE Marine Laboratory in Sarasota, Fla. The conference, organized by Guggenheim, helps all three
countries streamline Gulf conservation eforts. At this one, participants pooled their data to develop a fiveto-10-year plan. The value of this network is that were able to mobilize quickly, noted Guggenheim.
Indeed, after the Gulf oil spill, he and his colleagues bridged communications among the U.S. State
Department, the U.S. Coast Guard, NOAA and the Cuban government. That may come in handy when Cuba
begins ofshore oil exploration next year. Consuelo Aguilar, a lead researcher at University of Havanas
Center for Marine Investigations, and a longtime collaborator of Guggenheim, is one of 17 Cuban scientists

She says U.S. collaboration is

vital for Cubans struggling to reap the benefits of their free
university studies. We Cubans are well-educated, but we dont
always have the resources we need to carry out full investigations.
For example, we havent completed an exhaustive study on sharks
who received a visa for the Trinational Initiative conference.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

83
Cuba Af

since the 1960s. Our American colleagues have. Thats important

because these sharks are top predators that control the order of
marine life, and theyre in decline. Thanks to Guggenheims work with Cubans like
Aguilar, some 20 marine biology masters and doctoral students in Havana have field projects. In
addition to ofering an optimal marine study environment, Aguilar
affirms her people can show American researchers how to persevere
in tough economic times. Our best resource is humans. Were
creative and able to get things done with practically no tools , she said,
adding that her marine center often teaches school children about ecology so that they will be prepared to
protect it.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

84
Cuba Af

Oil Spills Solvency Lifting Embargo Solves

Spills
Lifting Embargo solves damage from Oil Spills
Fesler, 2009

[Lily, Research Associate The council on hemispheric relations, Cuban Oil:

Havana's Potential Geo-Political Bombshell, Washington Report on the
Hemisphere29. 11. (Jun 18, 2009), Accessed online via Proquest] Wyo-MB
Some are concerned about the possible en- vironmental costs of
drilling. Florida Senator Bill Nelson has warned that "an oil spill or other
drilling accident would desecrate part of Flor- ida's unique environment and possibly dev- astate its $50 billion tourism-driven
economy." The best way to ensure that such an event does not occur
would be for the U.S. itself to take part in, or monitor the extraction
process. The problem is that Washington has no power over
Havana's extractive practices as long as Cuba is drilling only within
its own territorial waters, so cooperation and joint projects would be
the best way to promote the safety of the drilling process. U.S. oil
companies can be expected to take part in the excavation process as soon as
the outdated embargo is superseded. The Ob ama administration has said its
recent modest opening of relations with Cuba was intended to "extend a hand
to the Cuban people, in support of their desire to determine their own future."
If Washington truly wants to help, normalization of relations could
lead to immediate improvements in the dismal economic situation on the
island. Cuba has received over 1 15,000 barrels a day of generously
subsidized oil from Venezuela in 2008, and that number has since increased.
Otherwise unable to aford oil, Havana profoundly needs this discount along
with the docto rs-for-oil swap; this points out Cuba's inability to avoid its past
mistakes and history. The disastrous economic fallout in Cuba after the
collapse of the Soviet Union, and the consequent sudden loss of over $5
billion worth of yearly subsidies, should have taught Havana to be wary of
overdependence on other countries' generosity. Havana's relationship with
Caracas proves otherwise: Hugo Chavez yearly provides the Castros with well
over an estimated $2 billion worth of oil subsidies each year.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

85
Cuba Af

Oil Spills Internal Link Global Spread

That spills over globally

Kozlof 10 (Nikolas, "Left Must Fine Tune its Position on Cuba Embargo
in Light of Oil Spill," Mongabay, May 26,
http://news.mongabay.com/2010/0526-kozlof_cuba.html)
Castro is right on the money in his criticisms. However, the fact is that Cuba, just like Venezuela, is
also in thrall to unsustainable oil which places the Gulf of Mexico in
environmental peril. Heavily energy dependent on other countries, Cuba has
unfortunately sought to lure foreign investment to develop ofshore
oil deposits. Such investment could add to the regions already
worrying ecological profile. At this point, the last thing the region needs is more ofshore oil
operations going up just 50 miles of the Florida coast. Currently, Cuba produces approximately half its
energy needs from onshore wells while receiving the remainder from Venezuela at favorable prices.
Naturally, Cuba would like to develop more energy sovereignty and sees ofshore development as crucial
towards that efort. Indeed, according to a recent report issued by the U.S. Energy Information
Administration (E.I.A.), "there has been considerable interest in exploration activities in Cuba's ofshore

Cubas authorities estimate that its

ofshore basins could contain more than 20 billion barrels of
undiscovered reserves, though that figure is somewhat disputed. The deposits are
reportedly located in Cubas part of the Gulf of Mexico, which abuts
the U.S. and Mexican areas of the gulf. "However," remarks the E.I.A. report, "actual
basins, especially in the Gulf of Mexico."

exploratory drilling in the area has been, to date, quite limited." That scenario looks likely to change. Just
this month, Reuters reported that Spanish oil giant Repsol YPF had contracted an Italian firm to construct
an oil rig which could be bound for Cuban ofshore oil operations. Back in 2004, Repsol drilled the only
exploration well in Cuban waters and subsequently declared that it had found hydrocarbons. Later, other
foreign oil companies joined the fray with Norwegian Statoil and a unit of Indias Oil and Natural Gas Corp
establishing a partnership with Repsol. Ever since that first well was drilled, the oil industry has been
chafing at the bit to enter Cuban waters full force. Reportedly, Repsol is moving ahead at long last towards
drilling a second and maybe even a third exploration well. The work could start as early as the fall, and one

If
Repsol drills that second well it could unleash an ominous Pandoras
Box. In the event the company is successful, Reuters writes that it "will open the door to
full-scale exploitation of Cuba's ofshore." Already, Cubas section of the Gulf of
source close to the project told Reuters "Things are moving forward, there will be no more delays."

Mexico has been divided up into 59 blocks and 17 of those have been leased to Repsol and its partners.
One of those partners is Venezuelas state-owned oil company PdVSA. President Hugo Chvez says he is
horrified by BPs mess and recently declared he would send oil experts to Cuba to advise the island nation
on how best to handle the spill. "This is very, very bad," Chvez said. On the other hand, Venezuela hardly
inspires confidence: earlier this month the country had its own rig accident when a natural gas exploration
rig leased by PdVSA nearly sank. Hopefully, the BP disaster will lead Cuba to permanently and irrevocably
shelve its plans for ofshore oil development. Yet, in order to do so the island nation will have to drastically
reverse course from the past few years. In addition to Venezuela, Norway and India there are other
significant players who have inked ofshore oil agreements including big Russian and Brazilian energy
companies. In the event that Cuba fails to heed the warning of the BP spill and goes ahead with ofshore oil
exploration in the long-term, it could be years before new wells are developed and significant oil is

the island nation lacks needed oil infrastructure,

technology and skilled labor. That could be a boon to the environment, but dont count
Cuba out just yet: the authorities are already planning a deep sea terminal
for supertankers in the northern port of Matanzas and seek to
upgrade a long pipeline which stretches across the island to an old,
Soviet-built refinery. From an environmental point of view, the prospect of
ofshore oil development going forward is not something to be taken
lightly. Cuba is the most biologically diverse of all Caribbean islands
and sports spectacular white sand beaches, vast coral reefs, and a
wide range of fish populations. Cubas coastline and mangroves
recovered. Simply put,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

86
Cuba Af

serve as breeding grounds for hundreds of species of fish as well as

other marine organisms. Ocean currents carry important fish larvae
from Cuba into U.S. waters, which in turn help to replenish ailing American fisheries. The
U.S. and Cuba share an ancient deepwater coral system stretching
all the way up to North Carolina. In addition, Cuba has more than
4,000 islets which support important reef fish such as grouper. The
islets also support sea turtles, dolphins and manatees [ the latter already in
danger as a result of BPs oil spill as I recently pointed out]. Crucially important, the islets
serve as refuges for endangered species. If that was not enough reason to press the
pause button on ofshore oil, consider the plight of Caribbean birds. In recent days, the U.S. public has

If oil production reaches

Cuba we could have further disasters since important populations of
North American migratory birds spend much of the year on the
Caribbean island.
been subjected to the tragic spectacle of oiled pelicans in the Gulf.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

87
Cuba Af

Oil Spills Impact Key Biodiversity Hot Spot

Cuba is a critical biodiversity hot spot
Brookings Institute 9 ("A New Era for US-Cuba Relations on Marine and
Coastal REsources Conservation," April 28,
http://www.brookings.edu/events/2009/0428_cuba_environment.aspx)
Cuba sits at the convergence of the Atlantic Ocean, Caribbean Sea
and Gulf of Mexico. Its coastal waters are dense with islets, keys and
reefs that provide critical habitats and spawning grounds for a rich
array of fish, endangered sea turtles, manatees and other marine
life. Preserving Cubas biodiversity is critically important to the
natural resources and economies of coastal communities in the
United States and other neighboring countries.
Active scientific and management cooperation is needed to address the
growing threats to Cubas biodiversity including coral reefs, migratory bird
habitats, marine mammals and turtles, and biodiversity shared throughout
the region. Greater communication and collaboration among scientists,
conservation professionals and government agencies could benefit both
the United States and Cuba, as well as the shared ecosystems that
link both nations.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

88
Cuba Af

Oil Spills Impact Biodiversity

Biodiversity loss leads to extinction

Diner gender paraphrased 94

Military Law Review Winter 1994 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161 LENGTH: 30655 words
ARTICLE: THE ARMY AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT: WHO'S
ENDANGERING WHOM? NAME: MAJOR DAVID N. DINER BIO: Judge Advocate
General's Corps, United States Army.
Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of
specialist species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems
inherently are more stable than less diverse systems. "The more complex the
ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. . . . [l]ike a net, in
which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can
resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if
cut anywhere breaks down as a whole." n79 By causing widespread
extinctions, humans have artificially simplified many ecosystems. As biologic
simplicity increases, so does the risk of ecosystem failure. The spreading
Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the
United States are relatively mild examples of what might be expected if this
trend continues. Theoretically, each new animal or plant extinction, with all
its dimly perceived and intertwined afects, could cause total ecosystem
collapse and human extinction. Each new extinction increases the risk of
disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's
wings, n80 [hu]mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

89
Cuba Af

AT: Health Care Disad

WFI 13
Pre Camp

90
Cuba Af

Health Care DA 2AC

NO IMPACT Cuban Health care cannot solve disease
National Review 7/30/2007 The Myth of Cuban Health Care
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/cuba/health-myth.htm
To be sure, there is excellent health care on Cuba just not for ordinary
Cubans. Dr. Jaime Suchlicki of the University of Miamis Institute for Cuban and Cuban-American
Studies explains that there is not just one system, or even two: There are three.
The first is for foreigners who come to Cuba specifically for medical care. This is known as
medical tourism. The tourists pay in hard currency, which provides oxygen to the regime. And the
facilities in which they are treated are First World: clean, well supplied,
state-of-the-art.
The foreigners-only facilities do a big business in what you might call vanity treatments:
Botox, liposuction, and breast implants. Remember, too, that there are many separate, or
segregated, facilities on Cuba. People speak of tourism apartheid. For example, there
are separate hotels, separate beaches, separate restaurants separate everything. As you can well
imagine, this causes widespread resentment in the general population.

The second health-care system is for Cuban elites the Party, the military,

official artists and writers, and so on. In the Soviet Union, these people were called the nomenklatura.

And their system, like the one for medical tourists, is top-notch.
Then there is the real Cuban system, the one that ordinary people
must use and it is wretched. Testimony and documentation on the subject are vast.
Hospitals and clinics are crumbling. Conditions are so unsanitary,
patients may be better of at home, whatever home is. If they do have to go
to the hospital, they must bring their own bedsheets, soap, towels,
food, light bulbs even toilet paper. And basic medications are
scarce. In Sicko, even sophisticated medications are plentiful and cheap. In the real Cuba,
finding an aspirin can be a chore. And an antibiotic will fetch a
fortune on the black market.
A nurse spoke to Isabel Vincent of Canadas National Post. We have
nothing, said the nurse. I havent seen aspirin in a Cuban store
here for more than a year. If you have any pills in your purse, Ill take them. Even if they
have passed their expiry date.

The equipment that doctors have to work with is either antiquated

or nonexistent. Doctors have been known to reuse latex gloves
there is no choice. When they travel to the island, on errands of mercy, American doctors make
sure to take as much equipment and as many supplies as they can carry. One told the Associated Press,

[Cuban] doctors are pretty well trained, but they have nothing to
work with. Its like operating with knives and spoons.
The

And doctors are not necessarily privileged citizens in Cuba. A doctor in exile told the Miami Herald that, in
2003, he earned what most doctors did: 575 pesos a month, or about 25 dollars. He had to sell pork out of
his home to get by. And the chief of medical services for the whole of the Cuban military had to rent out his
car as a taxi on weekends. Everyone tries to survive, he explained. (Of course, you can call a Cuban with
a car privileged, whatever he does with it.)

So deplorable is the state of health care in Cuba that old-fashioned

diseases are back with a vengeance. These include tuberculosis,
leprosy, and typhoid fever. And dengue, another fever, is a particular menace. Indeed, an

exiled doctor named Dessy Mendoza Rivero a former political prisoner and a spectacularly brave man
wrote a book called Dengue! La Epidemia Secreta de Fidel Castro.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

91
Cuba Af

NOT UNIQUE - Cuban health care is struggling the

economy and the embargo
The Economist 7/14/2012 Cuban Health Care: Under Investigation
http://www.economist.com/node/21558613
Until recently, Cubans were justifiably proud of their health-care
system. Life-expectancy matches that of Americans, who are eight times richer. Infant mortality ties
with Canadas as the lowest in the Americas. Measles jabs have been near-universal for more than 20
years, putting Cuba ahead of many rich countries.

But Cubas crumbling economy has put this system under stress.

Though the state still trains armies of doctors, a third of these are deployed overseas in soft-power

Pharmacies are generally ill-stocked. In many hospitals

patients must provide their own sheets, food and dressings. Neglect
of infrastructure means that almost 10% of the population lacks
access to clean drinking water. The American embargo against the
island does not help: equipment for radiology, mammograms and
cancer therapy is hard to replace, says Julia Sweig of the Council on Foreign Relations,
missions.

an American think-tank.
Ral Castro, the president, who this month visited China and Vietnam, is trying to revive the economy by
cautiously transferring chunks of it into private hands. The next step, reported this week, will be to let

If the health
service is to thrive again, this sort of economic surgery will need to
speed up.
transport and other service workers form co-operatives, currently restricted to farming.

NOT UNIQUE - Health care declining supplies & staf

The Economist 3/24/2012 The deal's of; Inequality page proquest
health services and education are becoming harder to access and
getting worse. Secondary-school enrolment is below its 1989 peak. There is a surfeit of humanities
graduates and a shortage of agronomists and engineers. Although infant mortality has
continued to fall, maternal mortality has risen. Many drugs are in
short supply. Hospital patients sometimes have to bring their own
sheets. There are reports of doctors starting to demand payment. On a weekday morning in a village in
And now

the inappropriately named municipality of La Salud ("health"), south of the capital, this correspondent
came across an elderly woman who had hurt her arm and was whimpering with pain, having found no
doctors in attendance at two health clinics.
In 2010, 37,000 Cuban doctors and other health workers were working in 77 countries around the world,
mostly in Venezuela but also in Africa, the Caribbean and Central America. The Cuban government also
ofers scholarships to 20,000 Latin Americans to study medicine--all part of its obsessive search for
international prestige. But

the main reason for the shortage of medical staf is

low salaries. A woman who gave her name as Grisel says she worked as a family doctor for just $23
a month, but now earns $40 a month in an improvised craft shop in Havana. She has two small children. A
pair of children's shoes costs $13. As a doctor "I faced a choice of buying shoes or eating."

LINK TURN - Embargo restricts Cuba from access to

necessary medicines and tech
Xinhua News 11/28/2012 Cuban healthcare weakended by U.S.

embargo http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/health/201211/28/c_132004531.htm
HAVANA, Nov. 27 (Xinhua) -- Cuban medical authorities said on Tuesday a 50-year
trade embargo imposed by the United States has severely undermined
the country's healthcare system.
Cuban hospitals sufer restrictions in acquiring imported medical
consumables and medicine, advanced medical technology and latest
scientific information, officials said.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

92
Cuba Af

The public Institute of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery, where

thousands of people receive free medical care every year from international
specialists, is financially strained by the embargo.
"We must find alternatives that sometimes include purchasing from distant markets, buying
from third parties, which means higher prices for these products," said
Director of the institute Dr. Lorenzo Llerena.
He added some equipments were simply unattainable, "because they
are manufactured in the United States."
The embargo has caused Cuba a loss of more than 200 million
dollars in the medical sector alone by 2011, representing a significant impact on the
tiny Caribbean nation, according to official figures.

John Rhodes, a patient, told Xinhua that Cuba had made a great efort for the
benefit of all its citizens.
"It provides us free medicine across the country, which is highly expensive around the world," he said,

"due to the U.S. embargo, sometimes we do not have all the raw
materials and tools to solve certain problems immediately."
adding

LINK TURN - Embargo devastates health care system

supplies & lack of information exchange
Amnesty International 2009 The US Embargo Against Cuba: Its
Impact on Economic and Social Rights
http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/amr250072009eng.pdf
The negative impact of the US embargo on the Cuban health care
system and on the right to health of Cubans during the 1990s has been documented in a
1997 report by the American Association for World Health (AAWH).45 The
300-page document is still the most comprehensive study on the issue. Based on a fact-finding mission to

the AAWH identified that the embargo contributed particularly

to malnutrition afecting especially women and children, poor water quality, lack of access
to medicines and medical supplies, and limited the exchange of
medical and scientific information due to travel restrictions and
currency regulations. The AAWH found that a humanitarian catastrophe has been averted only
Cuba,

because the Cuban government has maintained a high level of budgetary support for a health care system

the U.S.
embargo of food and the de facto embargo on medical supplies has
wreaked havoc with the island's model primary health care
system.46
designed to deliver primary and preventive health care to all of its citizens Even so,

WFI 13
Pre Camp

93
Cuba Af

Health Care DA N/U Ext

Health care system is crumbling budget cuts
Associated Press 8/25/2012 Cuba Health Care: Budget Cuts Threaten
Sector Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/cubahealth-care_n_1832955.html
HAVANA -- Cuba's system of free medical care, long considered a birthright by its
citizens and trumpeted as one of the communist government's great successes, is not immune to
cutbacks under Raul Castro's drive for efficiency.
The health sector has already endured millions of dollars in budget cuts
and tens of thousands of layofs, and it became clear this month that Castro is looking
for more ways to save when the newspaper voice of the Communist Party, Granma, published daily details
for two weeks on how much the government spends on everything from anesthetics and acupuncture to
orthodontics and organ transplants.
It's part of a wider media campaign that seems geared to discourage frivolous use of medical services, to
explain or blunt fears of a drop-of in care and to remind Cubans to be grateful that health care is still free

analysts, who
predict further cuts or significant changes to what has been a pillar of the
socialist system implanted after the 1959 revolution.
despite persistent economic woes. But it's also raising the eyebrows of outside

"Very often the media has been a leading indicator of where the economic reforms are going," said Phil
Peters, a longtime Cuba observer at the Lexington Institute think tank. "My guess is that there's some kind
of policy statement to follow, because that's been the pattern."
The theme of the Granma pieces, posters in clinics and ads on state TV is the same: "Your health care is
free, but how much does it cost?"
The answer is, not much by outside standards, but quite a bit for Cuba, which spends $190 million a year
paying for its citizens' medical bills.
Based on the official exchange rate, the government spends $2 each time a Cuban visits a family doctor,
$4.14 for each X-ray and $6,827 for a heart transplant.

Scarcities now are common and sanitary

conditions fall short of the ideal in decaying facilities where paint peels from
the walls. Patients often bring their own bed sheets, electric fans, food
and water for hospital stays.
It's not a luxury service though.

Cubans lack resources for necessary medicine and

equipment
Global Politics 2007 The Challenges of Health Care in Cuba

http://www.global-politics.co.uk/issue9/hanna/
However, challenges remain. Healthcare may be free and available for all
Cuban citizens but medication is not. Pharmacies are often very poorly
stocked and rationing of supplies is minimal. 13 There are claims that
hospitals are often in poor conditions and doctors have to bring in
their own supplies and equipment to allow them to treat their
patients. 10 Despite the production of medical supplies and
technology, it seems very little of this actually remains in Cuba. Every
year Cuba exports huge amounts of medical aid, mostly to other Latin American
countries for purely financial returns. 22 For example, Venezuela provides much-needed oil to Cuba and in
exchange receives Cuban doctors and medical supplies. 14

Medication and
equipment is there and available but only to pay for in American dollars,
of which the poor and middle classes of Cuba are very unlikely to
have. 23 The pesos pharmacies and local state hospitals are
drastically under-stocked and thus access for the poor to needed
medication is minimal, despite the service being free.
Cubas dual economy has a lot to do with why such disparity exists.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

94
Cuba Af

WFI 13
Pre Camp

95
Cuba Af

AT: Health Care DA Link Turn Ext

Embargo prevents access to necessary tech
SurfKY News 4/15/2013 UK Delegation Visits Cuba, Learns About its
Healthcare System http://surfky.com/index.php/communities/303-lexingtonfayette-county/29814-uk-delegation-visits-cuba-learns-about-its-healthcaresystem
Many of the problems with Cubas health care system are associated
with the American embargo, Berres said. This prevents them from
having access to the latest pharmaceutical and technological
advances, so many of their facilities are very basic.

Embargo prevents access to tech and medicine

CNN 9/02/2009 Report: U.S. sanctions put Cubans' health at risk
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/09/01/amnesty.cuba.health/
LONDON, England (CNN) -- The U.S. trade embargo on Cuba is endangering
the health of millions by limiting Cubans' access to medicines and
medical technology, human rights group Amnesty International alleged Wednesday.

An Amnesty report examines the efects of the sanctions, which have been in place since 1962. Amnesty
International Secretary-General Irene Khan called the U.S. embargo immoral and said it should be lifted.
"It's preventing millions of Cubans from benefiting from vital medicines and medical equipment essential
for their health," Khan said.

The embargo restricts the export of medicines and medical

equipment from the U.S. and from any U.S.-owned company abroad.

Amnesty also called on President Obama to not renew the Trading with the Enemy Act, which is due for
renewal on September 14. The Act has been reviewed by U.S. presidents on an annual basis since 1978.
Amnesty said that while not renewing the Act would not in itself end the embargo against Cuba, it would
send a clear message that the U.S. is adopting a new policy toward Cuba.
In April this year President Obama lifted restrictions that had prevented U.S. citizens from visiting relatives
in Cuba, and sending them remittances.
A U.S. State Department spokeswoman would not comment on the report because she hadn't read it.
However, she said, "The president believes it makes strategic sense to hold on to some inducements we
can use in dealing with a Cuban government if it shows any signs of seeking a normalized relationship with
us and begins to respect basic human rights."
The Amnesty report also cites United Nations data that says Cuba's inability to import nutritional products
for schools, hospitals and day care centers is contributing to a high prevalence of iron deficiency anemia.
In 2007, the condition afected 37.5 percent of Cuba's children under three years old, according to UNICEF.
Cuba can import these products from other countries, but there are major shipping costs and logistical
challenges to contend with.
Gail Reed is international director of MEDICC (Medical Education Cooperation with Cuba), a non-profit
organization that encourages cooperation among U.S., Cuban and global health communities.

the embargo has a sweeping efect on Cuban

healthcare. Over the past decades, I would say the people most afected have been cancer and HIVShe told CNN, "In general,
AIDS patients."

"Doctors in Cuba
always worry that an international supplier will be bought out by a
U.S. company, leaving medical equipment without replacement parts
and patients without continuity of medications," Reed said.
Gerardo Ducos, an Amnesty researcher for the Caribbean region, told CNN that although
medicines and medical supplies can be licensed for export to Cuba,
the conditions governing the process make their export virtually
impossible.
She also said the embargo afects the way doctors think about the future.

WFI 13
Pre Camp

96
Cuba Af

Embargo restricts health care equipment & chemicals

Amnesty International 2009 The US Embargo Against Cuba: Its

Impact on Economic and Social Rights

http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/amr250072009eng.pdf
The provision of health care has also sufered from the limitations and
restrictions imposed by the embargo on the procurement of basic
and specialized medical equipment and chemical components
needed for the production of generic medicines .

Embargo hurts health care hampers UN programs

Amnesty International 2009 The US Embargo Against Cuba: Its

Impact on Economic and Social Rights

http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/amr250072009eng.pdf
The increase in the costs for purchasing the necessary medicine or
medical materials is hampering the implementation of UN
development projects and programmes. The repercussions of these difficulties are
ultimately felt by the intended beneficiaries of these programmes, who face long
delays before having access to adequate medicine or treatment.

Embargo hurts health care infrastructure

Amnesty International 2009 The US Embargo Against Cuba: Its

Impact on Economic and Social Rights

http://www.amnestyusa.org/pdfs/amr250072009eng.pdf
The impact of economic sanctions on health and health services is
not limited to difficulties in the supply of medicine. Health and
health services depend on functioning water and sanitation
infrastructure, on electricity and other functioning equipment such as Xray facilities or refrigerators to store vaccines. The financial burden and commercial
barriers have led to shortages or intermittent availability of drugs,
medicines, equipment and spare parts. It has also hindered the
renovation of hospitals, clinics and care centres for the elderly.64