William LeoGrande is a go-to voice when it comes to Cuba-U.S. relations.

He is a professor of government at American University and has written and edited several books about Cuba and U.S. Cuba policy.

Belly of the Beast journalist Liz Oliva Fernández sat down with LeoGrande in Washington D.C. to discuss the U.S.’s ongoing economic war against Cuba.

LeoGrande explains the reason behind Biden's labeling of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism, shows why changing Cuba policy would not affect Democrats in this year's elections and breaks down how U.S. sanctions have made the human rights situation in Cuba worse.

TRANSCRIPT

Liz Oliva:

How long have you been working on Cuba issues?

William M. LeoGrande:

I've worked on Cuba pretty much my whole academic career, since I graduated from school back in the late 1970s. I went to Cuba for the first time in 1978, when President Carter lifted the travel ban completely on Cuba. And I try to get back there at least once a year since that time.

I've written a lot about U.S.-Cuba relations and Cuban politics. I've written or edited more than half a dozen books on Cuba over the years.

Liz Oliva:

Do you think the United States is waging an economic war against Cuba?

William M. LeoGrande:

I think there's no question the United States is waging an economic war against Cuba and has been since 1960. The United States policy of hostility towards Cuba that's been in place for so many years is really a form of economic warfare designed to demolish the Cuban economy as much as possible, make the lives of ordinary Cubans as difficult as possible, in the hope that somehow this will make them rise up and overthrow their government.

Liz Oliva:

Is U.S. policy towards Cuba affecting U.S. citizens?

William M. LeoGrande:

The biggest impact on U.S. citizens is restrictions on the right to travel. You have to go as a group if you want to go on an educational trip to Cuba. You can't stay in most of the hotels because of the restrictions on where Americans are allowed to stay.

The other impact is on Cuban Americans and their ability to be in touch with their family, to travel to visit their family, to send remittances to their family.

Liz Oliva:

Do you think that the Cuban people are suffering [from sanctions] or do you think that these sanctions are helping Cubans?

William M. LeoGrande:

There's no question that the sanctions have a terrible impact on the standard of living of people in Cuba. There's absolutely no doubt about it. The United States is the most powerful economic country in the world. And when it puts sanctions on a country it has a major impact. And the sanctions against Cuba are extraterritorial in their scope.

Liz Oliva:

There’s a lot of politicians in the U.S. saying that sanctions are not a big deal. Are you sure

that they are actually hurting the people?

William M. LeoGrande:

So, before COVID, about 15% of the tourists that went to Cuba to visit were from the United States, non Cuban-Americans from the United States. That represented a significant part of the tourism market in Cuba. And of course, tourism is now sort of the central pillar of the Cuban economy. Donald Trump cut that off.

Cuba gets about $3.7 billion a year in remittances, and 90% of it comes from the U.S. That fell by two thirds when Trump imposed [restrictions]. So, there are billions of dollars of revenue that Cuba has lost as a direct result of U.S. sanctions. Cuba was earning hundreds of millions of dollars from the export of medical services. That is to say, Cuban doctors, nurses, medical technicians,going on internationalist missions abroad. The Trump administration began a policy, and the Biden administration has continued the policy, of actively discouraging third countries from contracting to receive Cuban medical services.

And it's been largely successful because a lot of countries, particularly countries in Africa, don't want to take the risk of alienating the United States and losing U.S. economic assistance if they signed medical service contracts with Cuba.

It's impossible to argue that that doesn't have a huge and terrible impact on the Cuban economy and the government's ability to import food and medicine and fuel. And all of those things have a direct impact on the standard of living of the Cuban people.

Those who deny that the embargo is having any impact are using it as a kind of propaganda talking point, because they want to argue that Cuba's economic problems are entirely the fault of the Cuban government.

Now, there's no question that the Cuban government's management of the economy has left a lot to be desired and it's contributed to the economic problems on the island, but to argue that the embargo doesn't have an impact is nonsense.

Liz Oliva:

How is the U.S. designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism affecting the Cuban people?

William M. LeoGrande:

Putting Cuba on the terrorism list means that banks all around the world have to do extra due diligence in their relationship with Cuba in order to be sure that they're not laundering terrorist funds. Banks don't want to have to do that. It's a big expense for them. It's a risk for them.

If the United States decides that somehow they violated these regulations, they can be subject to major fines.And so, the result of that is that rather than take the risk, they simply stop doing business with Cuba, because they don't make a lot of money from the business that they do with Cuba, and it's not worth it to them.

Liz Oliva:

Is Cuba a sponsor of terrorism? Do they have concrete examples hat Cuba is really a sponsor of terrorism?

William M. LeoGrande:

No, Cuba is not a sponsor of international terrorism.

The last annual report on human rights practices of countries around the world that the Department of State put out, when it talks about Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism, it mentions that Cuba refused to extradite the negotiators from the Colombian ELN back to Colombia when the previous Colombian president wanted them back.

The reason Cuba refused to extradite them is because Cuba had an agreement with the previous Colombian government that these people engaged in the negotiations would not be subject to extradition. And Norway, also a sponsor of the negotiations, backed Cuba up on that. Well, the current president of Colombia has restarted those negotiations. So, that whole argument now has become moot. It’s off the table.

The only other thing that the report cites is the fact that Cuba has given political asylum to a number of fugitives from the United States who were engaged in politically motivated violence back in the 1960s and the 1970s.

But they're not engaged in international terrorism. So, they don't even fit the definition of terrorists, of international terrorists, that's in the law that created the terrorism list.

So, the whole rationale that the United States has been offering for Cuba being on the terrorism list is just a political smokescreen for a policy designed to make life harder for Cuba.

Liz Oliva:

Do you think that the sanctions are helping Cuba improve the human rights situation?

William M. LeoGrande:

The irony is that the United States justifies its sanctions against Cuba because of the Cuban government's human rights practices. The reality is that every time U.S. and Cuban relations become more tense and more hostile, the Cuban government feels more under threat and more of a sense of being under siege. And they become less tolerant of domestic critics and dissidents and opponents.

It's when U.S.- Cuban relations are warming up a little bit that the Cuban government feels less threatened and is more tolerant of a broader range of political discussion.

Liz Oliva:

Biden doesn't seem offended with the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia, or Egypt. And they’ve been doing business with them since always. So, why is Cuba different?

William M. LeoGrande:

U.S. human rights policy has never been consistent from one country to another. The United States always puts human rights secondary to what it sees as more important interests. Security interests, sometimes economic interests. So whether it's Egypt or Saudi Arabia or Turkey, or a number of other countries where the human rights situation is as bad or worse than the human rights situation is in Cuba, the United States has these other interests. And human rights get to be subordinated.

The problem for Cuba is that, as a national interest of the United States, Cuba is not hugely important. And so, it's possible to simply beat up on Cuba without much cost to the administration. I think that's a mistake because, at the end of the day, there are a lot of issues, mutually important issues, that Cuba has with the United States and the United States has with Cuba. Whether it's migration or environmental protection or counter-narcotics operations. A whole range of issues that can really only be handled effectively if Cuba and the United States cooperate.

Liz Oliva:

Do you think that they're going to pay attention to Cuba soon?

William M. LeoGrande:

When Joe Biden was running for president he said that he would go back to Obama's policy of normalizing relations between Cuba and the United States, for the most part. But once he became president, he didn't actually do anything for the first year and a half. And there was never a clear explanation as to why, except the White House said: “Well, Cuba's just not a priority for us now.”

But there's a broader context I think. Florida politics has always been an important component of U.S. Cuba policy. Biden is running for re-election. He doesn't have much chance of winning in Florida, but Democrats are reluctant to just write off Florida completely. And, of course, you've got Senator Menendez, a close friend of Biden when Biden was in the Senate, who has the president's ear and is constantly telling him: “Don't do anything to relax the relationship with Cuba.”

Liz Oliva:

Do you think that Biden has a chance to win the elections in Florida at this point?

William M. LeoGrande:

I think that the results of the 2022 midterm elections demonstrate that Florida has become a red state and that Democrats really have no chance of winning a statewide race in Florida. And so, logically, Florida should no longer be a political obstacle to changing U.S. policy towards Cuba.

But the problem is there are other Democrats running in Florida, not in statewide races, who continue to pressure the Biden administration not to change its policy. Obama showed it was possible to change Cuba policy and open a more normal relationship with Cuba and not pay a political price for it. Cuban Americans actually supported Obama's policy in the majority at the time.The problem, I think, with Biden, is that Biden came of political age during the Cold War, and so he sees the world through this kind of Cold War prism, whereas Obama was a post-Cold War politician.

Liz Oliva:

Are you hopeful about the future?

William M. LeoGrande:

I'm hopeful about the future of U.S.-Cuban relations in the medium- and long-term. I'm not too hopeful in the short-term because the Biden administration doesn't seem interested in changing the policy much further than they already have. But Cuba and the United States have always been close, and the two peoples have always liked one another. They've borrowed culture from one another. They've traveled back and forth. Cuban Americans have made Miami one of the most vital and vibrant cities in the United States. And so, I think it's in the long-term interests of the Cuban people and the people of the U.S.,and ultimately of the two governments, to have a better relationship.

Liz Oliva:

Do you think the Cuban government has the will to have a good relationship with the United States government?

William M. LeoGrande:

I think the Cuban government has always been interested in improving its relationship with the United States because Cuba's political leadership have understood that it would be much better for Cuba's future if it had a normal relationship with the United States. And frankly, the United States has never regarded Cuba as an equal and sovereign country. Not since we intervened in Cuba's war of independence in 1898 and turned Cuba into a kind of neo-colony for the next 50 years.

Not since 1959, because the United States has always regarded Cuba's rebellion against U.S. interests as unacceptable to it. Cuba is in the U.S. sphere of influence, in our own backyard. And so, U.S. policymakers have never really reconciled themselves to the idea that Cuba would be a sovereign, independent, socialist country just off the shore of the United States and could still have a normal and positive relationship with Washington.

Liz Oliva:

Do you think that Cuba has to make concessions in order for sanctions to be lifted?

William M. LeoGrande:

This has been an argument by people, particularly those who support the embargo, that Cuba's not doing enough, Cuba's not responding positively when the United States takes small steps. In fact, if you look back historically, it's really been the reverse. The United States, on a number of occasions, has promised Cuba that we would engage in a broad discussion about lifting the embargo if only Cuba would do certain specific things, particularly around migration. And Cuba has generally done those things. And then the United States has failed to follow through with its promises of a broader negotiation.

The problem with the kind of quid pro quos that the United States has often demanded are infringements on Cuban sovereignty. From the end of the Cold War on the U.S. demand has been that Cuba become a multi-party democracy with a free market as the price of normalizing relations. This is written into the Helms-Burton legislation since 1996. And Cuba's response, not surprisingly, is that: “We're a sovereign country and we're not going to make concessions about how we organize our politics or how we organize our economics just to win the favor of the United States.” So, historically, the way quid pro quo has been framed it's really been a nonstarter in the relationship.

Liz Oliva:

If you are Biden's advisor what would you suggest to him to do about Cuba?

William M. LeoGrande:

The first thing I would advise President Biden is to change the basic framework of his policy and move back towards the framework that President Obama put in place, which is a policy of trying to normalize and improve bilateral relations in order to make progress on various issues of mutual interest. And I think, specifically, things that could be done right now to get from where we are to that, would be, first, to take Cuba off the list of state sponsors of international terrorism. It doesn't belong on the list.

I think there are things that the United States could do that would serve the interests of the people of the United States, like further relaxation of the limitations on travel with Cuba, a reduction of some of the restrictions on trade and investment, particularly with Cuba's private sector, which is now growing and become really robust. The Biden administration has promised to do some things that would help the Cuban private sector. And yet, so far, it hasn't done any of those things.

The embargo is a terrible humanitarian disaster for Cuba. This is why the last three popes, including John Paul II, who was no left-winger, have opposed the U.S. embargo on Cuba. That's why every country in the world except Israel votes against the U.S. embargo at the United Nations every year for the last 30 years. So, the humanitarian impact on Cuba of the U.S. embargo is recognized around the world, but it's just not something that is important enough in the United States to get the administration to change the policy.