The WaPo sees the light on Obama and Cuba
Lately the WaPo has been backing off from its kneejerk approval of the Obama administration, but this editorial along those lines is especially strong:
IN RECENT months, the outlook for the Castro regime in Cuba was growing steadily darker. The modest reforms it adopted in recent years to improve abysmal economic conditions had stalled, due to the regime’s refusal to allow Cubans greater freedoms. Worse, the accelerating economic collapse of Venezuela meant that the huge subsidies that have kept the Castros afloat for the past decade were in peril. A growing number of Cubans were demanding basic human rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly.
On Wednesday, the Castros suddenly obtained a comprehensive bailout ”” from the Obama administration. President Obama granted the regime everything on its wish list that was within his power to grant; a full lifting of the trade embargo requires congressional action. Full diplomatic relations will be established, Cuba’s place on the list of terrorism sponsors reviewed and restrictions lifted on U.S. investment and most travel to Cuba. That liberalization will provide Havana with a fresh source of desperately needed hard currency and eliminate U.S. leverage for political reforms.
See what I mean?
The WaPo goes even further, and departs from the somewhat bipartisan clamour of the “sanctions weren’t working anyway” crowd:
Mr. Obama argued that his sweeping change of policy was overdue because the strategy of isolating the Communist regime “has had little effect.” In fact, Cuba has been marginalized in the Americas for decades, and the regime has been deprived of financial resources it could have used to spread its malignant influence in the region, as Venezuela has done. That the embargo has not succeeded in destroying communism does not explain why all sanctions should be lifted without any meaningful political concessions by Cuba.
Read the whole thing; it doesn’t falter.
I’m not sure what’s going on at the WaPo, and I’m not sure whether it will encompass more than this issue (and their excellent reporting on the UVA story), but it’s something. At one point a while back, noticing some of the softening, I thought perhaps it was a set-up for Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, but it’s hard to see how that factors in here unless Clinton herself starts to comment negatively on Obama’s Cuba move.
At any rate, I’m glad to see it. Mock and revile the MSM as you wish, but the WaPo and the Times are still very influential in shaping public opinion among legions of liberals. Contrast the WaPo‘s editorial with the one in the Times, which is a model of fulsome praise:
The administration’s decision to restore full diplomatic relations, take steps to remove Cuba from the State Department list of countries that sponsor terrorism and roll back restrictions on travel and trade is a change in direction that has been strongly supported by this page. The Obama administration is ushering in a transformational era for millions of Cubans who have suffered as a result of more than 50 years of hostility between the two nations.
Mr. Obama could have taken modest, gradual steps toward a thaw. Instead, he has courageously gone as far as he can, within the constraints of an outmoded 1996 law that imposes stiff sanctions on Cuba in the pursuit of regime change…
Cuba’s president, Raéºl Castro, deserves credit for his pragmatism. While Cuba remains a repressive police state with a failed economy, under his leadership since 2008, the country has begun a process of economic reforms that have empowered ordinary Cubans and lifted travel restrictions the government cruelly imposed on its citizens.
You get the drift—let’s applaud Raul! Sickening. I’d love to see evidence of these “empowered ordinary citizens”; au contraire.
[NOTE: The WaPo’s motive does not appear to have been to help Hillary, because she has come out in favor of the deal and reports are that she pushed it heavily when she was SOS.]
My attitude has always been what I expect Pope Francis’ attitude likely is, since apparently he’s been involved in brokering this change: Regardless of what it does or does not do to the evil government of Cuba, the embargo ultimately hurts the citizens of Cuba.
Now, the fault still remains entirely with the government, but the effect is the same.
I’m not saying I agree with the idea of lifting these sanctions because I understand and agree with why they were created, but as the NY Times said in the part you quoted, they don’t seem to have had much effect on the Castro regime.
Of course, I also realize the common sense of the WaPo quote, that it has kept Cuba from spreading its evil elsewhere. If the Cuban economy is weak, then Cuba can’t build a military, etc.
But ultimately it seems that we are punishing the citizens of Cuba and not really causing much pain and discomfort to the dictator in charge.
The biggest irony, however, when people like Obama, Jimmy Carter and NY Times want to cozy up to the Castros is what former residents of Cuba who have escaped have to say. They have nothing good to say about these evil people, and I’ve heard many times ex-Cubans living in the U.S. expressing shock and fear that the U.S. electorate keeps trying to push us down the same road.
“I’m not sure what’s going on at the WaPo, and I’m not sure whether it will encompass more than this issue (and their excellent reporting on the UVA story), but it’s something.”
New ownership?
Vanderleun: “New ownership?”
Who knew Jeff Bezos was anti-Communist? If so, “Go Jeff!”
I agree wholeheartedly with the WAPO editorial. In fact, I think the “Board” has been reading my mind. Whatever, it’s good stuff.
“But ultimately it seems that we are punishing the citizens of Cuba and not really causing much pain and discomfort to the dictator in charge.”
The evidence actually points the other way. Decades of Canadian and European tourism has done nothing but line the pockets of the Castros. Why would American trade and money coming in be any different? By lifting any embargo we just assure that the dictators continue their ways. The people of Cuba will always be left out until that government changes. All Obama has done is give the tyrants a new lease on life. How does that help the citizens???
According to Howie Carr, one of the local talk radio hosts, Bezos’ family members were Cuban refugees who escaped Castro. Funny how that influences your thinking.
Paul in Boston:
Aha, it was a stepfather, who helped raise him:
The “empowerment” of ordinary Cubans is such pretezel logic the Times deserves an award for supreme absurdity.
Bezos is well known around the Seattle area to be a libertarian. That is perhaps wrong, as he rarely says anything about politics.
If its correct – it would definitely signal a change in direction – if slowly.
“WE are punishing the citizens of Cuba?” What utter nonsense. The Castro regime is doing the punishing. Just like Putin is punishing Russians. If anyone had any doubts about Obama (Fool or Knave?) how about something along the lines of, Oh, say, “traitorous slimeball.” Just imagine the ass-kissing, obsequeous lounge Marxists Obama will be sending to Cuba as the cutting edge of American “diplomacy.” And now, of course, we will hear the media engaging in another round of rapture over “free health care” and “literacy.” Read or re-read Michael Totten everyone.
no end until every inch of stolen property is returned to its rightful owners, with interest and any european corporation that illegally built on that land be prosecuted.
Funny how liberals like Obama and others so quickly rubbish JFK.
G Joubert,
All former icons provide traction when thrown under the bus. These are not the JFK era democrats of the past, they hate America and will trash previous ‘heroes’ to push the agenda of destruction.
I see William Ayers as the first U.S. ambassador to Cuba of the new era.
The change in WaPo is real and is certainly linked to the change in ownership. Bezos can see that WaPo was going down the toilet if it didn’t find a way to differentiate itself from NYT. The paper seems to be trying to find the middle ground between NYT and WSJ. One could see this coming when Bezos gave Little Ezra Klein the boot.