Written by James Caldwell.

The Biden administration has set off a firestorm with its decision to remove Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism. The move is part of a larger deal brokered with the help of the Catholic Church to secure the release of political prisoners held on the island. While it’s being celebrated in some circles as a humanitarian breakthrough, critics argue it’s a shortsighted move that jeopardizes national security and rewards a regime with a troubling history.

The Details of the Deal

Announced on Tuesday, the White House notified Congress of its intent to remove Cuba from the state sponsor of terrorism designation. According to senior administration officials, this decision comes in exchange for Cuba’s promise to release “many dozens” of political prisoners, whom the U.S. believes are unjustly detained. These prisoners are expected to be freed before President Biden’s term ends on January 20.

As part of the deal, the U.S. will also ease certain economic pressures on Cuba. This includes relaxing some policies implemented in 2017 by then-President Donald Trump, who took a hardline approach to the communist regime. Trump reinstated the terrorism designation for Cuba in January 2021, citing its support for Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro, its refusal to extradite Colombian rebels, and its harboring of wanted Americans.

The Biden administration’s reversal has drawn sharp criticism from Republicans, especially those with personal ties to Cuba’s history. Senator Marco Rubio, whose family fled the island before Fidel Castro’s communist revolution, has been a vocal advocate for maintaining sanctions. Fellow Republican Senator Ted Cruz blasted the decision, calling it “unacceptable” and pledging to work with the incoming administration to reverse it.

A History of Controversy

Cuba’s place on the terrorism list has been a political football for decades. President Barack Obama removed the designation in 2015 as part of an effort to normalize relations between the two countries. But Trump’s administration reversed course, citing Cuba’s actions in Venezuela and elsewhere.

Supporters of the Biden administration’s decision argue there’s no credible evidence that Cuba is actively supporting international terrorism. Human rights groups, including the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, have long urged the U.S. to lift the designation, saying it’s an outdated relic of Cold War-era policies. They believe engagement, not isolation, is the key to influencing Cuba.

But critics see things differently. They point to Cuba’s continued alliance with Maduro’s regime and its refusal to hand over fugitives wanted in the U.S. These actions, they argue, demonstrate that Cuba has not reformed its ways and remains a destabilizing force in the region.

Political Prisoners and the Price of Diplomacy

At the heart of the deal is the release of dozens of political prisoners. These individuals have reportedly been detained for their opposition to Cuba’s government. While their freedom is undeniably a victory for human rights, the question remains: at what cost?

Critics argue that the U.S. is setting a dangerous precedent by making concessions to a regime with a long history of human rights abuses. They fear it sends a message that bad behavior will be rewarded, encouraging other authoritarian governments to take similar actions.

The Rubio Factor

As the incoming Secretary of State under the new Trump administration, Senator Marco Rubio is expected to play a key role in shaping U.S. policy toward Cuba. Rubio’s Cuban roots and strong anti-communist stance have made him a leading voice on the issue. He has consistently advocated for maintaining sanctions and using economic pressure to push for democratic reforms.

Rubio’s confirmation hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will undoubtedly touch on his views about Biden’s decision. It’s likely he will push for a swift reversal once he’s in office.

Our Take

The Biden administration’s decision to remove Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism is a risky gamble. While the release of political prisoners is a noble goal, the broader implications of this deal cannot be ignored. By easing economic pressure and granting diplomatic wins to a regime with a track record of oppression and support for authoritarian allies, the U.S. risks undermining its own credibility.

This move also sends mixed signals about America’s stance on human rights. If we’re willing to compromise with Cuba, what message does that send to other oppressive regimes? Diplomacy should not come at the expense of accountability.

Ultimately, this decision could have far-reaching consequences for U.S. foreign policy and national security. It’s a stark reminder that actions have consequences, and not all deals are worth the price.