Search News


Browse Archives

News

Usted No Puede Ir

July 7, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The choice of postsecondary institutions for students who fancy a trip to Havana has dwindled precipitously in the last two years because of tightened federal restrictions on study abroad programs to Cuba.

In September 2004, the Treasury Department released new guidelines for travel to Cuba that restricted study abroad to programs that last at least 10 weeks, include only students from the institution conducting the program, and are supervised by a full time employee. In other words, no adjuncts allowed. The rule changes -- which a group of scholars and students have filed a lawsuit to challenge -- stem from the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba's report to President Bush, released in May 2004. The report, led by then Secretary of State Colin Powell, recommended that short trips to Cuba be eliminated so that tourism masquerading as educational travel would not lend financial support to the Cuban government.

Experts estimated that, of several hundred Cuba programs that existed before the rule changes, fewer than a dozen remain.

Augsburg College in Minnesota apparently holds the distinction of being the first institution to actually pay a fine to the Treasury Department for travel to Cuba by its students. In May, the Treasury Department said that Augsburg had paid $9,000 for sending students to Cuba between 2000 and 2004 without a license from the Office of Foreign Assets Control. College officials said they were told the license was not needed.

A search of Treasury Department records showed that, at least since 2003, Pace University was the only other institution of higher education that paid a Cuba-related fine. Pace forked over $5,600 in 2004 after, according to a university spokesman, students and faculty members booked a trip with a travel agency that had failed to obtain the proper licenses. The trip never happened. Molly Millerwise, a spokeswoman for the Treasury Department, said that the department does not comment on specific fines, but that she could not think of other fines to colleges or universities .

Even with their fine settled, though, Augsburg students and faculty members aren’t planning on any Havana nights any time soon.

Augsburg used to run student trips that would last for about one to three weeks, in which students might study anything from foreign relations to public health or Cuban music. Those trips are simply too short to meet the newer guidelines, and it’s “very difficult to find a core group of students to go to Cuba for a semester,” said Regina McGoff, associate director of Augsburg’s Center for Global Education.

Augsburg started its trips to Cuba in 1998, when travel to Cuba became legal, but it has been two years since the last trip, and new ones are unlikely. “It's done from our perspective,” McGoff said, “and, unfortunately, from most college’s perspectives.”

Some colleges and universities relied on gathering students from multiple colleges to get a large enough group to make a longer trip worthwhile financially. Butler University was one such institution. But, with the requirement that each institution must deal only with its own students, Butler’s program has been suspended indefinitely.

Not every institution, however, has given up. It’s unclear exactly how many programs still travel to Cuba, but numerous calls to colleges and experts revealed that programs still exist at, at least: American University, Hampshire College, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Sarah Lawrence College, the State University of New York at Buffalo, and SUNY-Oswego.

Sarah Lawrence had to end some of its shorter trips, but 19 students will be headed to Havana for the fall semester. According to Prema Samuel, Sarah Lawrence’s director of international programs, the college has consistently had at least a dozen students willing to go to Cuba for a full semester, and the college doesn’t use adjuncts so there was no trouble finding full-time faculty members to go along. Sarah Lawrence, does, however have to apply for a new travel license every year, as opposed to every three years as was previously the case. Samuel said that, because the college can’t be sure if it will get a license each year, students are advised to have backup plans. “As far as [the U.S. government] is concerned, they’re saying, ‘we’re giving you the opportunity to have a program. Take it or leave it,’ ” Samuel said. “We’re taking it.”

Johns Hopkins University, on the other hand, is leaving it. Wayne Smith, an adjunct professor of Latin American studies at Hopkins, used to take 15-25 students to Cuba for three or four weeks between semesters or in the summer. There are not 10 weeks between semesters, though, and Smith said that not as many students are willing to go to Cuba for 10 weeks in the summer. Additionally, because Smith is an adjunct, he can no longer lead the trips, despite the fact that he is obviously an expert, having served as director of Cuban affairs for the State Department from 1977-79, a post he left to become the top American diplomat to Cuba.

“During the Cold War, we pushed the idea of academic exchanges with the Soviet Union,” Smith said. “The idea was that you could strip through their iron curtain by sending students. Why is that not true of Cuba?”

Smith is one of the few individually named plaintiffs in a case brought by several faculty members and students, as well as a group of about 450 academics called the Emergency Coalition to Defend Education Travel, against the Treasury Department.

The lawsuit, filed in June, alleges that the 2004 changes violate the four essential freedoms of a university -- “to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study” -- as outlined by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter in 1957.

Robert L. Muse, a lawyer for the academics, questioned the legitimacy of the government’s attempt to keep adjunct professors out of Cuba as a method of economic sanction. “You begin to wonder when the laugh test has to be employed,” Muse said.

Religious groups, in addition to colleges, have faced diminishing travel opportunities to Cuba. Augsburg, which is a Lutheran college, tried, and failed, to qualify for a travel license as a religious organization. Religious trips are now confined to four per year, and a pre-determined list of a maximum of 25 travelers must be lined up far in advance, according to Mavis Anderson, senior associate at the Latin American Working Group, which pushes U.S. policies that promote human rights and sustainable development in Latin America.

Muse expects the government to respond to the complaint in early fall. Until then, short-term educational trips to Cuba are “in a holding pattern,” Smith said.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Usted No Puede Ir

  • Posted by Steve Foerster , Director of Instructional Technology at Free Curricula Center on July 7, 2006 at 12:20pm EDT
  • The hypocrisy of opposing tyranny in Cuba through a government fiat on whether Americans can go there never ceases to amaze me.

  • Posted by Fidel on July 7, 2006 at 1:05pm EDT
  • While I appreciate those who complain about government intrusions into their lives, including the right to go wherever they want, travel to Cuba evokes for me images of tourists going to Munich in the 1930s, drinking beer while watching Jews being carted off, or tourists going to a plantation in the 1840s watching the slaves bring mint juleps to the varanda. The fact is that many who travel to Cuba do so largely out of curiosity, traveling to some "forbidden" place immortalized by Papa Hemingway. I have not heard of too many US visitors to Havana or Varadero carrying the writings of Jefferson or Montesquieu under their armpits. And they all have a round-trip ticket.
    There is a sadly simple answer on why Cuba is different. While Castro is in power, the only thing tourism and US travel to Cuba will do is to enrich him and his elite nomenklatura, which in turn will make the eventual transition all the more difficult. The Cuban FAR (the military) runs tourism and keeps most of its profits. Whatever cultural, political, and economic benefits tourism might bring do not flow to the Cubans. Why does anyone arrogantly believe, after half a century of amazing repression, economic ineptitude, and injustice, that democracy or change will come to Cuba once American tourists arrive in droves (think Cancun during spring break) when literally millions of French, Italian, Canadian, and German visitors haven't made one dent in moving Castro or his "apartheid" tourism toward any sort of liberalization? Ustedes no deberian ir.

  • Posted by Sam on July 7, 2006 at 9:35pm EDT
  • I wholeheartedly disagree with Fidel (both the previous commentor as well as his Cuban counterpart). I happen to be one of the few and privileged students that will be traveling to Cuba next semester legally. I believe that Fidel's views represent a very closeminded standpoint that only serves to widen the rift between the United States and Cuba. While I understand the logic (although I disagree with it) behind the embargo, I cannot begin to understand the logic behind an intellectual embargo. Even if students are drawn to Cuba out of sheer curiosity, why else are we compelled to travel? Has Fidel even bothered to consider that perhaps by traveling to Cuba, students may help to empower our nation to help the Cuban people through a better understanding of the innerworkings of their nation? I find it highly dubious that a few hundred American scholars and students will have a substantial impact upon one of the biggest economies of the Americas. Besides, we continue to send students to countries like Russia and China which continue to infringe on their own citizens' rights, yet we choo$e to look the other way. Aunque no estoy de acuerdo con Castro, sé que es mi derecho de viajar dondequiera me guste. Gracias.

  • Cuba travel
  • Posted by Norm on July 8, 2006 at 10:45am EDT
  • I have made trips to Cuba on the now ended "people-to-people" program, and it appears to me that our government has ended the program in its belief that too many of us saw the "real" Cuba, not the false image they want us to have. The Cuban system, bad as it is, works for most of the 11-million people living there. True, their living standards are low, but they also are not malnurished, they are highly literate, they are in good health (although their health care system would be much better if they could get more medicines, very difficult to do with the U. S. sanctions). I am more than sixty-years old (long past my student days), so grew up with the Cold War. That ended after years of talking with the "enemy," and allowing travel to the other side of the Iron Curtain. It is so important for today's students to travel the world, as they will be the ones to determine its future. Cuba should be the number one destination for these students. The current U. S. policy seems designed to set the stage for total conflict when Fidel Castro leaves the scene. Instead, we should be opening up to his government while he is still here, so that when he is gone, there will be something already in place for relations with whoever follows. And then, the Cuban people LIVING ON THE ISLAND, not those who fled to our country, can determine what "transitions" will take place in their land. It is TOTALLY WRONG for the U. S. government to deny our students the right to go.

  • Standing Up For The Generalissimo
  • Posted by RWH on July 8, 2006 at 4:00pm EDT
  • Back in the mid-1970s, I recall stating (more than once) that in my lifetime to date, the four world leaders who have contributed most to the freedom of “their” people at the greatest personal risk were Mahatma Gandhi, Nikita Khrushchev, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and yes Fidel Castro (Dwight D. Eisenhower would be a close fifth). The choice of Gandhi is a no brainer. I think time has proved me right insofar as Khrushchev and King are concerned, but events of the past forty years have caused me to wonder if I was right about Castro.

    In my opinion it is difficult to judge Castro in the light of a half-century of grossly stupid, inefficient, and inhumane policies of the United States of America toward Cuba. It is very difficult to know how much of what Fidel Castro is today is a function of his “grand design” and how much is a function of multiple reactions to some combination of (1) the selfish opportunism of more than a few American politicians, (2) the general ineptness of American foreign “policy,” and (3) our quite irrational collective fear of communism.

    Cuba poses no physical threat to us whatsoever. Yet we have invaded their sovereign land (more than once), we have attempted to assassinate their president (more than once), and we have a naval base at Guantanamo Bay on lands leased from Cuba, perhaps obtained under coercion (incidentally, there is no expiration date of the lease),. Since he has been president, Castro has cashed only the first rent check from the United States for our presence in Guantanamo.

    That Cuba -- communist or not -- is not a cooperative and successful member of NAFTA, and I repeat myself, is a function of the failure of decades of U.S. foreign “policy” shortsightedness. The “policies” of the U.S. toward Cuba are all about Castro … and when it comes to the mano a mana showdown between Castro and American Presidents Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, and Bush II … well even the C.I.A. couldn’t bail out that crew. Where is Ronald Reagan when we need a President to stand up and proclaim, “Mr. President, tear down that barrier between nations!” … and of course the “president” to whom I refer is the one residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. It is time to start the process by (1) immediately eliminating the embargo, (2) gradually assimilating Cuba into NAFTA, and (3) allowing citizens of a so-called free nation free access to travel in Cuba … and for whatever purpose. And, oh yes, it’s time to move the Florida Marlins to Havana.

  • The Real Cuba
  • Posted by Kevin , Undergraduate on July 11, 2006 at 1:20pm EDT
  • For those looking for the "Real Cuba," you may wish to start by looking outside the posh tourist resorts and the foriegn students only classrooms and actually travel off the tourist path.

    By doing this, you will risk arrest. Several tourists have been detained after photographing the conditions in the slums. Also, you will have to make do without running water, electricity, sewage or regular food, which is rationed in much of the country. You may find the housing standards are less than safe as well.

    I have never been to Cuba. How do I know these things and why do I believe them? I have relatives who were not fortunate enough to escape the country when my grandfather did. Some were killed by Castro's men. Others live today in rural poverty. They had electricity and running water in 1958. It was damaged in the fighting against pro-Batista forces being hunted down after the revolution and they have not seen it work since. My family has pictures they sent us prior to the 2002 crackdown by Castro's government on outgoing mail - their housing is crowded, a deep hole remains in the floor from the fighting and the house would be condemned in most other nations.

    Their food is rationed and much of the time there is not enough food available to even get the full amount allowed by their ration cards. Without electricity or oil for the lamps they had used to light the house for some time, there is no light after dark. Post 2002, money we had tried to send them was confiscated by the government both from the mail and from their house.

    That is the real Cuba. Many more Cuban Americans can give you similar stories and worse ones. I can elaborate on my cousins situation as well.

    I worried on another thread that when Americans go to Cuba, they often see only the approved tourist spots and come back raving about the empty beaches reserved for them and the professors in the foriegn-students-only programs. They miss what happens in the rest of this island as Castro amasses his kleptocratic fortune (various estimates range from $300 million to more than $1 billion) and they get to enjoy their reserved housing, food, classrooms and beaches.