On bilateral migration policy: food for thought

From Phil Peters’ The Havana Note, this might be the most concise and apt summary I’ve seen of the inconsistencies in U.S. policy toward Cuban immigrants. It is a strong argument for revision of those policies, as it directly responds to the opposition’s claims, as well:

“If you believe in the embargo as an instrument of pressure, it takes away that pressure by giving discontented Cubans a way out. The ‘dry-foot’ policy, which is not required by law, allows Cubans who arrive here without a visa to come right in even if they have no basis for asylum or refugee status. The quick, nearly automatic admission of nearly all Cubans makes a mockery of the ‘state sponsor of terrorism’ designation. The policy extends immigration privileges to people who were born and lived their lives outside Cuba, but have Cuban parents. It gives Cuban doctors serving on missions abroad a pass to come to the United States, even if they could remain without trouble in a country of first asylum. It allows Cubans who apply to immigrate on the basis of family unification to come on an expedited basis, an option not available to other nationalities. And… it gives Cuban immigrants the package of government benefits that go to refugees, even though the vast majority of Cuban immigrants do not have refugee status.”