Be careful what you wish for
In two months it will be one year since, on December 17, the governments of Cuba and the United States announced their intention to restore and normalize relations between the two countries. Diplomatic relations have been re-established, the nations’ respective flags have been run up at their embassies, several decrees by President Obama have modified some of the regulations applying to the embargo-blockade, and numerous official US delegations and groups of businesspeople have traveled to Cuba in an effort to reach additional agreements.
The Cuban government, however, insists that nothing has changed and that the blockade remains intact, and that there will be no "normalization" until all the embargo's terms have been lifted, the naval base at Guantanamo is closed and its land returned, and Cuba is compensated for the damages caused by years of sanctions.
A review of the comments of political scientists and experts in international relations and Cuban-American affairs suggests that behind the Cuban government's stance lies its interest in frustrating further rapprochement with the US, or taking any step that will facilitate the lifting of the embargo, in order to impede any kind of exchange with the most affluent society in the world. According to some simpletons, Gorbachev's opening up to the West was actually the cause of the demise of the socialist camp, rather than a result of its stifling internal contradictions.
The perpetuation of the blockade-embargo will serve, in turn, to justify the repression of thought and digressive political activity which, if it were to overcome current pressures, could grow too strong for the PCC to control.
According to some Obama's policy has failed and a new course should be charted, for it has not achieved its objective of influencing the internal situation in Cuba. But, in reality, the lack of a response by the Cuban government above all demonstrates its intransigence and its interest in stymying the lifting of the blockade-embargo, with a view to remaining in power.
Question: If the Cuban government is hampering the lifting of the blockade-embargo, does that mean Obama's policy is a failure, or does it confirm the policy’s wisdom? Don't those who argue that it is a failure realize that maintaining the embargo-blockade means kowtowing to those in Havana who want this?
Consequently, if the Cuban government is making every effort to maintain the blockade, because this enables the regime to more easily maintain internal control, supporting the maintenance of the embargo and opposing Obama's policy amounts to playing into the Castros' hand.
These opinions are expressed with the utmost respect for those who think differently, without any intention of accusing anyone of serving "Castro/Communist" interests.
Let everyone assess —without prejudices, if possible— the phenomenon itself. And, in any case, he would realize that if the "government of the Castros" is demonstrating that it really does not want to lift the blockade —as suggested by more than a few observers, as a full range of exchanges with the US would cause it to lose power— then it would be logical for those who want to change things in Cuba with regards to US policy to endorse the definitive lifting of all the clauses, codes and other regulations entailed by the embargo-blockade.
An old popular saying is germane here: "Be careful what you wish for."