Human Rights Watch released a report recently called “New Castro, Same Cuba“—an update on the human rights situation in Cuba. Interestingly, the Cuban state does not allow Human Rights Watch representatives to visit the island, but HRW claims that it did successfully send investigators to fact-find for this report.
The New York Times shares two points it apparently found most interesting in HRW’s 123-page work:
First, the report cited the cases of dozens of Cubans charged with “dangerousness” for being unemployed. “A person is considered to be in a state of dangerousness due to antisocial behavior if the person … lives, like a social parasite, off the work of others,” the report quoted Cuba’s Criminal Code as saying.
Second, President Obama should push to end the embargo and replace it with multilateral policy. HRW reiterates the message of many different interlocutors, saying that the embargo has been ineffective in pressuring the Cuban government to change its ways and successful only in imposing even more hardship on everyday Cubans.
In fact, “New Castro, Same Cuba” recommends that the Obama administration secure commitments from the European Union, Canada, and Latin American allies to unite to press Cuba to meet a single, concrete demand: the immediate and unconditional release of all political prisoners within six months. When this is achieved, HRW believes that the embargo should be dismantled.
I’ll be looking the report over thoroughly to peruse the concrete suggestions like this one. My immediate response, however, is: why should a failed policy that has been “successful only in imposing even more hardship on everyday Cubans” be continued even that long (and who knows how long it would be)? Logically, the very suggestion means that HRW supports continued hardship for Cubans if it will lead to release of prisoners.
There must be a better way to achieve this very worthy goal. What is it?