Change in U.S. Cuba Policy

It has been some time that President Obama announced an initial relaxing the this country's closed door foreign policy with respect to Cuba. More recently, it was announced some elements of travel restrictions and the Cuban Embargo have been lifted, opening the door to an ever more open relationship with one of our Caribbean neighbors.

There has been, however, a fair amount of opposition to these moves, despite the great potential in normalizing relationships with a country that we have had very limited dealings with since the revolution that brought the Castros into power. Marco Rubio and Rand Paul have exchanged barbs over the change in policy, notable not only because these are two potential opponents for the Republican nomination for President in 2016, but also because Paul is a Republican who agrees with Obama that beginning to normalize relations with Cuba is a good idea.

While it may not seem like sound to some (especially Rubio) that engaging diplomatically with Cuba is a good idea, increasing ties with Cuba marks a shift in policy that could bring actual change to Cuban society. The main purpose of the Cuban embargo and out shut door policy is regime change. In the short term, the United States wanted the embargo to weaken the Cuban regime with the long term goal of eliminating the Castros from power.

For 50 years, this policy has failed. The Castros are no closer to relinquishing power and it appears as if they will hold control of Cuba until they die. Since the previous strategies towards dealing with Cuba have been unsuccessful, it just might be the right time to try something else.

It is the right time to open relations with Cuba, especially considering the age of both Castro brothers. Setting up diplomatic relations and pressing for societal and governmental change in Cuba before a new regime takes form is in the best interests of the United States. Getting our foot in the diplomatic door could ensure that when the Castros do go, we can still work with the chosen successor. It could allow internet to come to Cuba, which can be a profound force for change in Cuban society.

Cuba and the Untied States are well suited both by geography and by economic resources to become powerful partners in the world economy. One day, trade and travel between the two countries can make us both more prosperous and better places to live.

A New Global Policy

A major problem that we face when trying to bring about peace around the globe is education levels in developing and war torn countries.  One way to measure this is by looking at the adult literacy rates, then comparing the rates to other countries.

Literacy Rates by country

The results we see are not promising.  Countries in the Middle East have literacy rates significantly lower than those of developed and even developing nation, especially for women.  This translates into fewer opportunities for members of those societies.  Without strong educational institutions, the youth in Middle Eastern and North African Countries have few opportunities to advance themselves, leading to rampant unemployment.

Without opportunities, often the only choice young people have is to associate with terrorist organizations. These young people have no future and no voice.  These young people need to be given a voice that does not involve setting off bombs.  Perhaps the Arab Spring has allowed the young people to find some way of expressing themselves and helped them vent their anger, but more needs to be done. We need to give them more, the future of a higher education.

So how does this affect our foreign policy?

In order to promote peace throughout the world, we must promote literacy and education.  Young, educated people are forces of change throughout the world.  By providing an education to lower class women, we can empower them more than ever before.  Instead of using bombs, we ought to use books to create a new global policy.  The Middle East has extreme poverty and although we may not think it is our problem, we need to make it our problem.  It is much more effective to bring up a country through education than to use crash and burn tactics of military action.

The United States must work with other countries to promote more NGOs to work inside these countries to promote education reform.  They must work with local governments to provide funding for schools.  Additionally, we must open our own doors to these young people who wish to pursue a higher education within the United States.  Politicians at home may not appreciate this policy, but it is much better in the long run to pursue a strategy of youth empowerment than to simply use military action.  We need to pursue a foreign policy of inclusion if we are to bring about peace in the Middle East, not one of exclusion.

A Changing of the Guard: US policy change in the Middle East

As the saying goes, the biggest export for America is freedom, and with thousands of US military personal and years of involvement, no other region has been on the receiving end of more American "freedom" than the Middle East.  However, this exporting has gotten extremely unpopular at home and abroad.  This change in opinion combined with the dramatic political changes in the region over the past two years has left many wondering what the new role for the United States is in this volatile region of the globe. The implications of our policies are huge, with the billion dollar question being who steps up to be the power player if the US goes into retirement.

One player who seems eager to step up to the Broadway stage is Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi.  Recently elected after the fall of the formerly US backed Mubarak regime.  He has been shrewd thus far, balancing his base in the Muslim Brotherhood and as a leader in the predominantly Muslim Middle East but also extending a more friendly hand to Israel to balance western interests. But just days ago, he announced that his decisions would be immune from review by law, a power grab that is angering citizens whose experience of Mubarak are fresh in their minds.  Also, how well will the US be able to work diplomatically with Egypt, as conservative members at home consider the Muslim brotherhood to be a terrorist organization.  

Mohamed Morsi

With respect to sovereign governments, the US needs to stop it's double standard of committing on face value to the pillars of democracy while blatantly controlling the governments.  Instances such as the installation of the shah in Iran in 1953 lead to future hard feelings.  The US needs to instead back the right of self determination for all people.

That being said, the US should not necessarily stand by, though we should not get overly involved.  Overextended empires fail, so we cannot over commit resources to unnecessary problems.  Using our own interests as a measure for criteria,  we then can use our diplomatic bargaining power to look out for our interests without compromising the integrity of a sovereign government.  If we get too involved in a country, we might break it, and if we break it, we own it.  That is one of the problems setting us back in Afghanistan:  we're stuck if we leave and we're stick if we don't.

The United States needs to adopt a foreign policy that is more in tune with the times we are in.  We should opt for engagement, instead of containment  and use diplomatic means whenever possible.  We should avoid overextending our resources and seek to empower other nations instead of setting up democracy for them.  If we maintain an open and inclusive foreign policy, perceptions on the United States might, over time, change for the better, and we can better work with other nations to make the world a better place.  This policy change is incredibly important, especially in dealing with an area as volatile as the Middle East.

US Must Stop Using Fighting as a Solution in Foreign Policy

A recent trend towards rough and tough militant foreign policy in this nation is worrying.  Instead of fighting to solve its problems, which takes a huge chunk out of our budget, not to mention  many human lives, we should instead pursue active diplomacy with other nations and groups.  Fighting a number of foreign wars only makes us overextended and weaker.  In forging a new time of foreign policy, which is collaborative rather than destructive, other nations might be more receptive to the influence that the United States wields.  By fighting many wars and having an aggressive presence in places like the Middle East, people will often reject the influence as counterproductive and combative.  To turn over a new leaf, the United States must change its outlook and policy on the world.

More Diplomatic Pressure Needed on Autocrats Pt 3

We need to be welcome and open to new governments created, and help them through hard times, giving them advice when necessary. We must, however, be careful not to intrude into a situation where nobody wants us to act. Yes, we feel that our opinion is worth more that 2 cents, but at the same time, countries have to be able to go it alone. We can help, but in order to create permanent solutions, they must be able to work out some problems for themselves.

More Diplomatic Pressure Needed on Autocrats Pt 2

The US government needs to up the diplomatic pressure on nations abusing its people and/or denying then rights. No, we should NOT go to war, and that shouldn't be an option in this case. That would be severely counterproductive, thus we must use diplomacy to achieve more democracy in the world. We can't just choose dictators that suit us, as the US has done in places like Chile. We need to work with other countries to create lasting stability in the world.

More Diplomatic Pressure Needed on Autocrats Pt 1

Now that popular protests have swept through the Middle East, Greece, Western Europe, Russia, and even this country, it is time the United States Government toggled with its foreign policy in order to solicit positive, permanent change throughout the world. In order to keep up the wave of change, the United States can help other countries with their own reform movements while setting the example of reform on the home front.

Next Step in Middle East Policy

The United States must now step up its efforts to make peace in the Middle East.  This is a fractious area, with many socioeconomic groups.  The US must start to clean up its image by helping new governments on the path to democracy.  It will not be easy, and the will be obstacles, but this is better than the fight-and-replace model we have in Afghanistan and Iraq.  At least now the propel are motivated for change.  That energy needs to be harnessed for good.