DEMOCRATIZATION: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF LIFTED ECONOMIC SANCTIONS IN CUBA AND BURMA.

• Date: 22 March 2018
• Published date: 22 March 2018
• Author: Amador, Stephanie
• Author: Amador, Stephanie

INTRODUCTION

On December 17, 2014, President Obama announced that the U.S. would restore full diplomatic relations with Cuba, opening up trade and commercial ties that had been cut off for nearly fifty-five years. (1) Normalizing relations after nearly six decades of hostility marks a stark transition in U.S. policy. The tumultuous U.S.-Cuba relationship dates back to the 1959 Cuban Revolution, where the U.S. began promoting Cuban democracy through diplomatic and economic isolation. (2) Democratization--protecting human rights and promoting democracy--is integral to U.S. foreign policy as it "seeks to end oppression, combat terrorism, and advocate democratic ideals and freedoms worldwide." (3) The U.S. has often imposed unilateral sanctions against countries to achieve these ends. (4)

Various countries, including Cuba and Myanmar/Burma ("Burma"), (5) were subject to such prolonged sanctions by the United States. (6) These sanctions, however, were recently lifted against Cuba in 2014 and against Burma in 2016 under the Obama administration, whose policy sought engagement rather than isolation. (7) Recent normalization between the U.S. and Cuba raises questions concerning the efficacy of economic sanctions to achieve democratization, particularly when such measures have unintended consequences on the target country's general population. (8) This Note will examine the history of U.S. sanctions in these two countries, and their effect on economic development and civil liberties.

Part I presents a historical overview of the U.S. foreign policy sanctions imposed on Cuba, which have become increasingly stringent since the end of the Cold War. Part II illustrates the Cuban human rights repercussions resulting from limited international interaction and resources under the embargo, revealing the overall inefficacy of severe economic sanctions. Particularly troubling were the implications under the multilateral sanction of the Cuban Democracy Act ("CDA") in 1992. (9) Part III explores the details regarding the lifted Cuban embargo under the Obama administration. Changes to U.S. sanctions have provided benefits to Cuba and the U.S., including furthering private-sector growth in Cuba, allowing Americans to travel to Cuba, and promoting technological communication throughout the island. (10) All benefits aside, changes that fully address U.S. interests in democratization of Cuba have yet to come to fruition. (11)

Additionally, by looking at post-sanction Burma, this Note will make suggestions on how to best facilitate democratization in Cuba. Part IV provides an overview of Burma's embargo history. U.S. sanctions on Burma date back to 1997, following "rising political repression and human rights abuses." (12) Part V examines the progression of human rights in Burma. In response to Burma's ongoing human rights efforts and democratic transition with parliamentary elections in 2015, President Obama terminated U.S. sanctions on Burma effective on October 7, 2016. (13) Part VI discusses the Obama administration's policy developments in Burma following the lifted sanctions, which offers informative context towards sanctions on Cuba. (14) Part VII and VIII assess the effectiveness of the lifted embargo on human rights in Cuba using Burma's change in regime as a model. Part IX concludes this Note by finding that while future U.S. foreign policy towards Cuba is uncertain, the U.S. should maintain normalized relations, while striving to create a more targeted sanctions program if it truly wants to bring about unparalleled change through a movement toward democracy in Cuba.

1. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW: THE CUBAN EMBARGO: U.S. FOREIGN POLICY SANCTIONS

   On January 1, 1959, Fidel Castro successfully ousted President Fulgencio Batista and secured power, embarking on a Revolution that would deteriorate U.S.-Cuba relations for the next half-century. (15) By 1960, Castro's regime had "seized private land, nationalized hundreds of private companies... and taxed American products...." (16) In response to nationalization, President Eisenhower invoked the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917 ("TWEA"), which suspended trade with Cuba. (17) On October 19, 1960, Eisenhower prohibited all exports to Cuba, marking the start of the Cuban Embargo (referred to as "el Bloqueo" in Cuba). (18) The embargo continued in 1961 under John F. Kennedy, was tightened in 1991 after the Cold War, and was codified into the 1996 Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act during the Clinton administration. (19)

   1. The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961

      The early 1960s were marked by hostile U.S. covert operations to overthrow Castro's administration, including the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban Missile Crisis. (20) In 1961, President Kennedy signed the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 ("FAA"), which authorized the president to impose a "total embargo upon all trade between the United States and Cuba." (21) On February 3, 1962, Kennedy proclaimed a formal embargo against all trade with Cuba after several failed attempts to displace Castro. (22) Kennedy, through Presidential Proclamation 3447, prohibited the "importation into the United States of all goods of Cuban origin and all goods imported from or through Cuba" and "all exports from the United States to Cuba." (23)

   2. THE CUBAN ASSETS CONTROL REGULATIONS OF 1963

      In July 1963, the Department of Treasury, under the authority of TWEA and Section 620(a) of the FAA, issued the Cuban Assets Control Regulations ("CACR"). (24) The CACR prohibits financial and trade transactions with Cuba and requires that all exports to Cuba be licensed by the Department of Commerce and the Bureau of Industry and Security, pursuant to the Export Administration Act of 1979. (25) The CACR has been amended over the years, (26) including loosened travel restrictions imposed in 1977 under President Carter, and later, the tightening of travel regulations under George W. Bush's administration. (27)

      From 1963 through 1975, "a near total embargo was imposed," whereby U.S. foreign subsidiaries were prohibited from trading with Cuba. (28) On July 26, 1964, multilateral sanctions were also imposed by the Organization of American States "(OAS"), who then lifted their eleven-year embargo against Cuba in August 1975, prompting the Ford administration to relax Cuban trade restrictions. (29) Carter became the first president to attempt to normalize relations with Cuba after the mutual U.S.-Cuba hostility in the decades following the missile crisis. (30)

   3. The 1992 Cuban Democracy Act

      Ronald Reagan's administration ended all attempts to accommodate Cuba because it was still under Castro's authoritarian rule. Reagan and his successors, Presidents George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton, advocated increased pressure on Cuba by strengthening the embargo in an effort to bring about a democratic political reform after Cuba undertook drastic economic reform following the collapse of the Soviet Union. (31) In 1992 Congress passed the CDA, which prohibited all foreign-based subsidiaries of U.S. companies from trading with Cuba, traveling to Cuba by U.S. citizens, and family remittances to Cuba. (32)

      Because the CDA imposed severe penalties on U.S. subsidiaries operating in foreign countries trading with Cuba, many foreign nations objected on grounds that it would ultimately hurt their economic interests, potentially appropriating their authority to implement necessary laws. (33) As a result, many U.S. allies--such as the United Kingdom and Canada--enacted laws preventing U.S. subsidiaries wishing to trade with Cuba from operating within their territories. (34) Despite all of its restrictions, the CDA also sought to bring humanitarian aid to Cuba through food donations, (35) medical supply exports, (36) postal infrastructure, (37) and assistance to support democracy. (38)

   4. The Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 (Helms-Burton Act)

      Hostility continued to ensue during the Clinton administration with the passage of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 ("Libertad"), also known as the Helms-Burton Act. (39) Libertad was enacted after the Cuban Air Force shot down two American civilian planes. (40) The purpose of the Act was to strengthen the embargo, encourage democratic elections in Cuba, assist in a transition towards a democratically elected government, and to safeguard Americans' property rights. (41)

      Title I of Libertad strengthened the economic embargo by: prohibiting the indirect financing of Cuba, (42) opposing Cuban membership in international financial institutions and reducing payments to institutions that provide loans or other assistance to Cuba, (43) removing Cuba from the OAS, (44) blocking the importation of Cuban-made commodities, (45) and prohibiting the importation of one of Cuba's most important export industries--sugar. (46) Title II intended to achieve democracy in Cuba, suspending the economic embargo upon a presidential determination that a democratically elected government came into power in Cuba. (47)

   5. The Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000

      Congress passed the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act ("TSRA") in 2000, which eased export restrictions in Cuba by allowing "the sale of agricultural goods and medicine to Cuba for humanitarian reasons." (48) Consequently, the U.S. became Cuba's fourth largest trading partner. (49) However, unlike Iranian, Libyan, or Sudanese sales, Cuban exports required either cash-in-advance payments or funding by a third-country financial institution. (50)

   6. Cuba's Relation with Foreign Nations

      Despite recurring sanctions and limited foreign policy affairs with the U.S., Cuba has nevertheless strengthened relations with other international players. (51) For instance, since Raul Castro became the provisional president, Havana has "hosted over seventy heads of state." (52) International relations, however, have not advanced economic globalization in...