As we near the end of Obama’s first 100 days, it would be hard to argue that this Administration has been reticent about stating its policies on national security and foreign policy issues.  We’ve heard major policy announcements on Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Russia, climate change and nuclear proliferation, just to name a few of the big fish that have been thrown onto the crowded frying pan.  And given the number of high-profile officials that have been named to coordinate key challenges, it seems that President Obama is looking to put his name in the Guinness Book of World Records under “most special envoys named.”

Yet, despite what has been a relatively forthright presentation of policy shifts on many other issues, the Administration continues to be relatively restrained on changing policy toward Cuba.  True, the Administration is lifting some restrictions, but that is small potatoes when you’re starting from a trade embargo, which apparently is not open for debate.

On April 17, Obama will meet with his counterparts from the Western Hemisphere at the Summit of the Americas.  Cuba will not be in attendance, and the Administration has gone so far as to point out that Cuba is not on the agenda.  It is clear that the President will hear a lot about Cuba and say very little.  The question is why.

There is some political cover for Obama to move boldly to dramatically increase engagement with Cuba.  Senator Richard Lugar has publicly supported such a move.  Senator Mike Enzi co-sponsored the bill to lift travel restrictions.  The House bill on lifting travel restrictions also has sponsors from both parties, which seems to be a rare accomplishment these days.  The Cuban American National Foundation now pretty much declares current U.S. policy a failure.  And a recent CNN poll shows nearly three-quarters of Americans supporting diplomatic relations with Cuba.

So, again, the question — why isn’t there a more robust Cuba policy?  Quite simply, because there doesn’t need to be.

It might seem quite obvious to observers that the embargo does not achieve its stated goals.  It may be clear that we have never managed to isolate Cuba or destabilize the Castro government.  It is possible that everyone in the Obama Administration, most of the Congress and a majority of the general public believe that Cuba policy should be changed.  And you know what — it just doesn’t matter.

Cuba is not a national security threat.  Cuba is not a foreign policy problem.  Though many leaders at the Summit of Americas may try to convince Obama otherwise, our Cuba policy does not have much effect on our relationships with other countries.  Despite some convoluted assertions by U.S. Government officials over the years, Cuba is not a source of terrorists or WMD.  Cuba can be ignored.

What is Cuba then?  Using Administration calculus, a likely political liability that is better left alone.  Cuba is the grand gesture that could tie up the Obama Administration in a media frenzy for weeks.  Any bold action on Cuba could threaten to delay or even derail countless other more pressing foreign policy objectives.

After all, you don’t get those poll numbers (or support in Congress) if the debate becomes about supporting the Castro brothers.  I would strongly urge those in Congress who want a change in Cuba policy to stay home rather than heading out on codels to Havana.  Supporters of the embargo — which also happen to be a bipartisan group — will scorch the earth to keep the policy, and every photo op taken with someone named Castro helps them rile up their base.  Though Obama has done a good job surrounding himself with foreign policy stalwarts, he is still relatively new at the game himself.  I’m sure his staff is not interested in giving political opponents a chance to use “President Obama” and “soft on dictators” together in a sentence.

So the lack of a wide-reaching new Cuba policy may be nothing more than the Obama Administration deciding it has too many other things to do to waste political capital defending a policy shift that is sound but will not actually make that much of a difference in terms of making the U.S. safer or stronger.  There are no consequences to taking no action on Cuba, regardless of how ineffective and outdated the current policy may be.

So is Cuba worth it?  I guess not.

Maybe next year?

Related posts:

1. Mexico’s Drug War: Our Newest National Security Threat?