Herald: Lift Travel Restrictions

Now for some post-Wilma blogging, just like the "good ol' days".

The Miami Herald ran an interesting editorial today on the travel policies of Cuba and the United States toward each other. It rightfully denounced Cuba's continued violation of denying its citizens free travel, even those with visas. It denounced the U.S. policy of Cuban-Americans visiting once every 3 years, limited to immediate family.

I have to say that I generally agree with the Herald's stance here. No one can accuse the Herald's editorial board for being soft on Cuba, recent editorials have been scathing in their criticism of Cuba's regime. Consider this paragraph from today's editorial:

For Cuba, the right to free travel is only one of many rights violated daily. No Cuban can legally leave or reenter the country without regime authorization. The regime also bars travel to punish relatives of Cubans who have left the island against government wishes. Cuba uses travel policy as a weapon to deter people from fleeing, prevent family reunification and drive a wedge between Cubans who stay and those in exile.

They even bring up the case of Jose Cohen, whose family in Cuba hasen't been allowed to travel to Miami to see him since he defected in 1994.

The editorial criticizes the U.S. policy, calling some of its measures "Draconian".

The United States has restricted Americans' travel to Cuba to varying extents since 1961, as noted in the new Human Rights report, ''Families Torn Apart: The High Cost of U.S. and Cuba Travel Restrictions.'' Some of the most Draconian measures took effect in June 2004. The rationale was to cut regime earnings from U.S. visitors. But also painfully cut are human relations, which serve to encourage and could ease a transition to democracy.

Now Cuban Americans may travel to see ''immediate family'' only once in three years. They can visit for only 14 days and must have a special U.S. license. Cousins, uncles and aunts aren't counted as ''immediate family,'' although they form part of typically close-knit Cuban families. The United States also eliminated provisions for humanitarian travel.

I don't necessarily buy the human relations angle the Herald brings up, but otherwise their argument here is reasonable.

I understand the reasons for tightening the travel to not allow the abuse that was occurring, but I feel the Bush administration went a bit too far. Enforce the restrictions better, don't punish those whose main intention is to visit relatives, especially elderly and sick relatives.

I also understand the attitude of those who arrived at the beginning of the exile and who've vowed to never step foot on Cuban soil until castro is gone. That's fine and I respect and admire that attitude. However, every case is different, and I honestly don't think that, say, allowing a group of Cuban-Americans to visit relatives for a limited time on a yearly basis, instead of every 3 years, is going to bolster castro's regime any more than the millions that currently pour in from Europe and Canada. Those who have sick and/or elderly relatives ought to be given special consideration.

To me, it's just the sensible thing to do.