• Submitted by: manso
• Politics and Government
• 10 / 09 / 2010

---

BRADENTON HERALD. Posted on Sat, Oct. 09, 2010. Approach has failed to spur reforms. This summer's massive BP oil spill took the steam out of reckless proposals to breach the 125-mile buffer zone for drilling off Florida's Gulf coast. But just when you thought it was safe to get back into the water, Cuba is lining up a Spanish company to drill next year off its coast just 50 miles from the Florida Keys.

If a well in those waters has a blowout like the one BP had, crude could start washing up on Florida beaches in three days, according to a recent New York Times report. And in a perverse consequence of the 48-year-old embargo on U.S.trade with Cuba, U.S. companies face prohibitive limits on providing the kind of equipment and expertise that could prevent a blowout, or contain the damage if one occurred.

It's yet another reason for leaders in Washington to rethink the nation's ineffectual and counterproductive policy of severely limiting economic engagement, through trade and travel, with Cuba.

That policy hasn't promoted fundamental political or economic reforms on the island. Recently Raul Castro announced that his government would lay off half a million state workers, relax some controls on private business and accept more foreign investment. Meanwhile, a U.S. House committee was poised to consider legislation to end the ban on travel to Cuba for most Americans before time ran out on the latest session of Congress.

We have long opposed the ban because it limits U.S. visibility and influence on the island. It also hurts the ability of many Cuban Americans to travel to Cuba because it permits Havana to be highly selective in choosing who gets a visa.

Most Florida politicians from both parties, wary of strong anti-Castro sentiment among their constituents, have vehemently opposed any easing of travel and trade restrictions on Cuba. Florida would be among the biggest beneficiaries of an opening of trade and travel between the United States and Cuba. U.S. exports to Cuba would surge,with much of them originating or moving through Florida. The Sunshine State would become a transit point for a flood of U.S. tourists to Cuba.

By engaging with Cuba, the United States would have some hope of influencing its government to take greater care in protecting both countries from the devastating impact of an offshore oil spill. Steps might include agreements that would keep some ecologically sensitive locations off limits. That could be a long shot, but with no engagement, there would be no hope.

Whether it's to guard the environment and economy of Florida or expose more Cubans to America's influence, an overhaul in the failed U.S. policy toward Cuba is decades overdue.

Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/message/118399