Selected
Article:
Should Mississippi farmers
support possible trade with Cuba?
by
David Waide
PRO
The
1996 Farm Bill was designed to make agriculture competitive
in all aspects of international trade. The farm community
depends greatly on exporting commodities and accessing markets
by exporting those commodities in a manner that will be
profitable to commodity production. It is important we do
not allow our government to be part of embargoes against
foreign countries.
We are concerned about whether or not we need to trade with
Cuba. Arguments exist that Cuba is most unfriendly toward
the U.S. In addition, it is a country that perhaps has one
of the worst human rights policies of any nation. I think
that we should legitimately question whether or not we need
to punish American producers of good and services with the
boycott of Cuba.
Logistics as far as transportation are most important to
access the Cuba market. It is the lowest transportation
rate we would have regarding export to some country not
adjacent to the boundaries of the U.S. In most instances
Cuba is closer to the production area of many commodities
than most of our states. That aspect alone can make Cuba
a very viable market for American agriculture.
As we examine embargoes that are placed on any country,
my most vivid memory of a political embargo is when Russia
invaded Afghanistan. At the time, we were selling soybeans
at record high prices. President Carter decided that he
would place a grain embargo on soybeans going to Russia
because of the invasion. As a result, we saw prices plummet
from $12 a bushel on soybeans to less than $6. Twenty-three
straight days the soybean market declined the limit. The
individuals punished were the soybean farmers. There are
no winners when it comes to political embargoes of this
type.
We all want to impose American social and economic policies
on other nations. We believe the capitalistic system is
the very best system that exists. Without a question we
have proven that in this industrialized nation. We stress
that individuals should be rewarded on the basis of their
productivity, not on any other basis. That is true of the
capitalistic system. If we are going to be successful in
getting other countries to improve their standard of living
and their human rights policies, how could we better accomplish
that task than by allowing our commodities to be exported
into their markets? As we develop foreign policy in the
future, our government needs to be aware that all segments
of the American economy can benefit by trade with other
nations.
If we are going to be a player in world markets, certainly
we need to be sure that our environmental standards are
not violated. We also need to be aware that our public policy
is directed in a manner that would cause those countries
to readily accept our products. As trade with these countries
continues, individuals who are attempting to produce products
in those countries will realize that the capitalistic way
is a better way of production than anything their government
offers.
Cuba can become one of our best markets for U.S. products.
My hope is that in the future we will realize the tremendous
export potential in Cuba and take advantage of that market
to the best advantage of those individuals who are U.S.
producers. DBJ
(David
Waide is president of Mississippi Farm Bureau.)
CON
Let’s
face the facts: Fidel Castro is still a Communist. I realize
it is not politically fashionable or correct to say the
word, but that’s what the despot is. What has wrecked
Cuba’s economy is not a lack of trade with America,
but Communism.
We must understand that doing business with Cuba means,
plain and simple, doing business with Castro. He clearly
wants us to end our embargo with the country he rules over
with his censorship and terror camps: it would be a propaganda
victory as well as enable him to receive the U.S. dollars
he wants so badly. It would do nothing for the Cuban people,
however, and we should we be more morally concerned with
whom and what we trade with.
Therein lies the rub: to those who argue that our trading
with Cuba would somehow modernize and “Westernize”
that island, a critical point is being missed. Our free
market and way of life is based on more than just Levi’s
jeans, McDonald’s hamburgers, and soybean trading.
The free market is based on the recognition of individual
liberty and the right to trade freely, which is a moral
issue. Castro’s Communism denies this freedom. Do
we really want to earn profits at the expense of propping
up a dictator who denies rights to and routinely brutalizes
his own countrymen?
If we were to end the embargo, not only would we risk the
real possibility of Castro nationalizing any investments
we make, the U.S. would also have to deal directly with
the Commandanté. We could not hire Cuban workers
directly—a government agency would do that for us.
We would also have to pay Castro very well—in hard
currency—for each worker; that worker, in turn, gets
paid a fraction of the amount, in the next-to-worthless
peso. After all, under Communism, the state is God.
A quick look at non-moral factors involving trade with Cuba
reveal some interesting facts: Several nations that now
do trade with Castro, including France, Spain, Italy and
Venezuela—have suspended credits to him because Castro
has failed to make payments on its debt, including debt
incurred on agricultural purchases. Still want to trade
with Cuba?
In addition, after all this time, Castro remains a firm
hater of the U.S. while simultaneously craving our money.
On May 10, 2001, Castro was quoted in a speech at the University
of Tehran saying, “Iran and Cuba, in cooperation with
each other, can bring America to its knees.” He’s
made literally thousands of similar anti-American comments.
One of the great advantages of our embargo is that it has
saved U.S. taxpayers millions of dollars in unappropriated
export insurance and subsidies, while France, Spain and
Canada are still waiting to be paid what they are owed.
I imagine it will be a long wait.
This nation’s taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize
a Communist tyrant. Whatever small benefits we might get
economically (and those are questionable) aren’t worth
the moral sell-out we’d be making. Don’t trade
with Castro. Keep the embargo going. Canadians and Europeans
have flooded Castro’s economy and absolutely nothing
has changed. Why should we join the charade? DBJ
(Kirk
Fordice is the former governor of Mississippi.)
