Cuban Democracy Act

The bill itself lays out America's criticism of the Castro government, noting that "The government of Fidel Castro has demonstrated consistent disregard for internationally accepted standards of human rights and for democratic values."[3] The first track of the bill tightened sanctions on the island and attacked countries that provided assistance to Cuba by denying said countries debt reduction or forgiveness.[7] In other words, Track I stipulated that, if a nation gave a certain amount of aid to Cuba, then the U.S. would cut off the same sum of aid to said nation.[8] Another aspect of the bill's first track was the Mack Amendment, tackling the trade between Cuba and U.S. subsidiaries in other countries, which generated $700 million (~$1.26 billion in 2021) in 1991 alone.[2] The Mack Amendment became effective in diverting needs to the island, as the bulk of trade with the banned subsidiaries consisted of food and medicine.[8]

Deviating from the economic war on Cuba, the CDA's second track worked to provide aid to the Cuban people in an effort to destabilize Castro and put faith in the United States.[2] This included opening up exports for food and medicine, as well as allowing family remittances, postal services, and telecommunications to and from Cuba.[3] Bush's signing statement for the bill emphasized the public rationale for the second track of the bill by saying "Our policy and this bill allow for humanitarian donations of food and medicine to nongovernment organizations in Cuba, help that will get to the Cuban people. And it allows for improved communications between the United States and Cuba, so that all of you can maintain contact with family members."[9] While originally the bill included the exchange of educational services and news offices in both Havana and Washington, groups against Castro led congress to balk against these additions.[7]

From the U.S. perspective, the New York Times argued that sanctions would only amplify Castro's fight against American hegemony in Latin America and put more faith and confidence in the regime.[10] The editorial additionally notes that the collapse of the Soviet Union and economy already had detrimental effects on Cuban trade that relied heavily on the Soviets.[10] In addition, Kam S. Wong from the University of Pennsylvania Law School argued in 1994 that the bill is in violation of international law along with foreign sovereign compulsion and crackdown on trade.[11]

The Cuban Democracy Act both fostered and broke apart the relationship between Clinton and the CANF.[1] This was due to Mas Canosa's expectations regarding the position of the assistant secretary of state for Inter-American affairs, which instead was planned to go to Mario L. Baeza, an Afro-Cuban lawyer.[1] However, Baeza's distance from the Cuban-American community ultimately led to the CANF leading a campaign to thwart his appointment, leading to the instatement of Alexander F. Watson.[1] Once in office, Clinton utilized a loophole within the act that allowed him to suspend it under the guise of "national security."[7] This dodging of a law in order to avoid true implementation further frustrated Cuban-American groups.[7]

Only days after Bush signed the bill into law on October 23, the European Commission protested that the act violated the conventions of international trade.[12] Likewise, the United Kingdom used the Protection of Trading Interests Act 1980 as a means of political protest against the Mack Amendment specifically.[12] Canada and many Latin American nations also expressed concern and condemnation of the bill's implications on international trade with Cuba.[12]

This opposition manifested into a Cuban-sponsored resolution in the United Nations on ending the embargo shortly after the bill was signed.[12] The resolution was carefully written to create content with the international community, as many were still wary of Castro's track record but still wished to block the U.S.'s attempts to control trade between Cuba and other countries.[12]