by Roy C. Smith
Mr. Obama’s visit to
Havana has refreshed the enthusiasm for a New Cuba that was created when he and
Raul Castro announced their intentions to “normalize” relations fifteen months
ago. But while enthusiasm is high,
progress in improving economic relations has been slow. The outlook is for it
to remain slow.
Since the announcement in December 2014, embassies have
reopened, travel restrictions administered by the US Treasury Dept. have been
relaxed, and some limited concessions to allow financial transactions have been
made. Cuban-Americans have travelled back and forth more freely with many
bringing money for investments in new licensed private enterprises that are
burgeoning.
However, Congress has done nothing to address the several US
laws passed over past decades that prevent US companies from doing business or
financial transactions in Cuba (called the “Embargo” by us, and the “Blocade”
by the Cubans), without which the major US economic opportunities of a New Cuba
will be remain sterile. Though
there are loopholes in these laws, without their repeal the President’s hands
are tied and there is little more he can do to speed things up while he remains
in office.
However, the Cubans have done very little to open their
economy for foreign investment, trade and development of their industrial
sectors and public infrastructure since the announcement. Non US enterprises seeking to engage
with Cuba, but unaffected by the Embargo, have been frustrated by Cuba’s slow
progress in opening up.
It is true that since Raul Castro became head of state in 2008, a number of economic policy changes
have occurred – mainly as a result of laying off about 20% of the work force
from government jobs to encourage them to become “self-employed”
entrepreneurs. This was a
necessary step to take as Cuba’s failed economy, propped up for years by the
USSR and then by Venezuela, slid further towards bankruptcy. Even so, the
government still employs about two-thirds of all workers.
Raul has said that economic reforms are necessary to preserve
“Cuban Socialism,” the legacy that more than 50 years of Castro rule has left
behind. Without the recognized
economic threats facing the country, it seems unlikely that Castro would have
agreed to the announcement.
Cuban Socialism (Communism is rarely mentioned) has had some
achievements – the population is literate, has access to decent free health
care, and enjoys a very high degree of income equality, though only to the
extent that everyone is equally poor.
But the economy is very sick. It had about a 2% growth rate for the five
years trough 2014, little to no foreign direct investment, and has accumulated
government debts equal to 125% of GDP. Cuba
must import 80% of its food (20% of which comes from the US under a human needs
exception to the Embargo) even though Cuba has vast amounts of uncultivated
agricultural land in a tropical climate. It has little to export but sugar,
cigars and rented-out Cuban doctors.
Despite all this, Cuba has experienced very little social
unrest. Civil authorities are powerful and strict, but so were they in the
Ukraine, Egypt, and in the former Eastern European states before these regimes
fell to public protest.
Indeed, Raul may feel that the announcement already has been
a big success. It has been popular with the people, and attracted lots of
attention to the prospects of a New Cuba. Without having to give much of
anything, Cuba’s foreign exchange inflows from tourism has greatly increased,
and GDP growth jumped to 4% in 2015.
Even so, though the announcement increased applications for
foreign direct investment, these have largely been rejected or stalled
indefinitely. Of 200 such applications since 2014, only about 35 have been
approved, and those were have faced draconian obstacles from the Cuban
bureaucracy to being implemented.
Raul’s ideas about economic reform seem only to go as far as
the retail sector – more small shops and street markets, but not large
corporate engagement in the agricultural, manufacturing or financial sectors
through which Cuban economic sovereignty, pride and “values” might be at
risk. Going that far but no farther,
however, will make little difference to Cuba’s considerable economic problems.
But, Raul says he will retire in 2018, at 86, and turn the
government over to someone else. Within
a few years, however, he and Fidel will join their revolutionary colleagues in
Cuban Socialist heaven, and a new team will have to decide how far to go.
In the meantime, other things are changing, due to Raul’s
earlier reforms and the announcement. One is the end of fifty-years of
anti-Americanism, and rising expectations for improvement in standards of
living and economic opportunity because of the possibilities of interacting
with the US.
Another, however, is a rapidly growing differential between
those who are making money from all the tourist trade (restaurants, real
estate, arts and entertainment) or otherwise from wheeling and dealing or
corruption. Already the sort of envy and public concerns about the power of the
newly rich has surfaced.
And, Cubans are getting more information about how others
live as compared to themselves. As the Internet becomes more available this
will spread further and faster.
Cuban-Americans are changing their attitudes. Recent surveys
show that most of the Miami Cuban population favors normalization, and many see
opportunities in bringing their capital and well developed business skills back
home.
So maybe the most likely near term future for Cuba is
continuing rigidity and hostility towards large corporations that will be
eroded by expectation sof normalization, drip by drip, until the Castros are
gone. By then, the Embargo (which
has little continued support in the US) most likely will be gone too, and a
greater flow of capitalist economic activity will result and this, as it did in
Eastern Europe, will start to carry away the last of the rigidities.
The Castros greatest fear, I presume, is that after them,
Cuba will revert to what it was in Batista’s time. A gold-rush of unrestrained capitalism
might just bring that about, but it doesn’t have to. The best thing for the Cubans to do over the next few years –
which some of them are –is to spend time planning for a modern political and
economic framework that can survive the transition from socialism to a
markets-driven form of mixed economy. There are a number of good examples from
the recent past – Poland, Hungary, the Baltic countries, Spain after Franco,
and more locally, Chile and Costa Rica.
And Gitmo? How about we write a 100 year lease with Cuba?
ReplyDelete