Today, nine retired senior military officers from the U.S. Army, Navy and Marine Corps nnounced their support for ending 50-year old travel restrictions with Cuba. In a letter to the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs, the officers - including several three-star and two-star generals and admirals - argue that Cuba does not pose a threat to the security of the United States.

Citing their national security experience and expertise, the signers say that a more open policy would allow Americans to exert greater influence on Cuban affairs, which "is what the Castro regime fears most."  The letter also emphasizes how "[d]irect contact with the Cuban people will put our values on display and help move along changes that can have significant benefits for American citizens, the Cuban people and our national security."

Retired Gen. Paul Eaton today published an op-ed in The Hill reinforcing this view. He writes: "In the name of national security and American national interests, our citizens, who are great ambassadors, should be allowed to travel [to Cuba.] This island nation 90 miles off our southern coast has long ceased to be belligerent ... From an historical perspective there is little basis for this ban."  Citing open U.S. travel policies toward Iran, Vietnam and former Soviet Union, he adds: "This policy is counterproductive and stands in stark contrast to our approach towards other adversaries. ...We need to reestablish the right to allow Americans to travel 90 miles to engage with the culture that made Miami fun again. This is good for our country, good for the Cuban people and a smart policy for our national security."

In addition to these military leaders and the National Security Network, who organized the letter, rescinding travel ban is supported by a broad coalition of business, agricultural and human rights organizations.  The bill, H.R. 4645 the Travel Restriction Reform and Export Enhancement Act, is scheduled for markup in the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs on Wednesday.

The full letter and op-ed are below. For more information on Cuba and U.S. national security, click here.

September 27, 2010

The Honorable Howard L. Berman (CA-28)

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs

United States House of Representatives

2170 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington, DC  20515

The Honorable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL-18)

Ranking Member, Committee on Foreign Affairs

United States House of Representatives

B360 Rayburn House Office Building

Washington, DC  20515

Dear Chairman Berman and Ranking Member Ros-Lehtinen:

We have spent our professional lives defending the national security interests of the United States and believe that action should be taken by Congress now to intensify our country's engagement with Cuba, starting with repeal of all remaining restrictions on the right of Americans to travel to Cuba.

We call for this change because our current policy limits Americans' freedom of movement while also undermining our national security, and prevents our nation's best ambassadors - the American people - from engaging directly with the Cuban people at a time when such contact would serve our nation's interests and goals. 

By increasing people-to-people contacts with Cubans, the United States will not be doing the Castro regime any favors; we would actually be doing the opposite.  What the Castro regime fears most is a thawing of its relations with the United States, and in particular, allowing its citizens to have direct contact with the American people. 

We have already seen how the loosened travel restrictions for families visiting relatives in Cuba have begun to build good will and change-from-within in Cuba.  Lifting the overall travel ban would extend this cultural and economic engagement and build on this momentum by helping to undermine the roots of anti-Americanism in that country, thereby enhancing our security by removing unnecessary sources of discontent in a country so close to the United States.

Finally, it is clear that Cuba does not pose a threat to the security of the United States.  It is also clear that the country is in the midst of multiple internal changes.  Therefore, now is the time for the United States to engage more directly, through its citizens, with the Cuban people by allowing our citizens to travel there.  Direct contact with the Cuban people will put our values on display and help move along changes that can have significant benefits for American citizens, the Cuban people, and our national security.

We strongly support you in your efforts to end the travel ban and look forward to your committee moving expeditiously to rescind the travel ban to Cuba.

Sincerely,

/s Lieutenant General John Castellaw, United States Marine Corps (Retired)

/s Major General Paul Eaton, United States Army (Retired)

/s Lieutenant General Robert G. Gard, United States Army (Retired)

/s Rear Admiral John Hutson, United States Navy (Retired)

/s Brigadier General David Irvine, United States Army (Retired)

/s Brigadier General John Johns, United States Army (Retired)

/s Lieutenant General Charles P. Otstott, United States Army (Retired)

/s Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, United States Army (Retired)

/s Brigadier General Stephen N. Xenakis, United States Army (Retired)

The Cuba travel ban: 50 years of a bad idea

By Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton (Ret.) - 09/27/10 06:42 PM ET

The House Foreign Affairs Committee will mark up legislation this week to end the travel ban to Cuba. In the name of national security and American national interests, our citizens, who are great ambassadors, should be allowed to travel there.  

This island nation 90 miles off our southern coast has long ceased to be belligerent, and all us should have the right to resume a rational relationship with Cuba and to enter into legitimate cultural exchanges with a country that has much to offer in the way of serious engagement. I believe Americans have quite a lot to offer Cuba - from a robust display of American values, to our media and just plain old human contact. We would all benefit from lifting the travel ban to Cuba.

From a historical perspective, there is little basis for this ban. And there is questionable constitutional support for continuing to deny American citizens the opportunity to travel only a short distance to what is arguably a wonderful tourist destination that is dynamic in its own way and possesses one of the world's delightful cultures.

This policy is counterproductive and stands in stark contrast to our approach toward other adversaries. For example, America isolated Vietnam following the conclusion of hostilities there.  Yet, more than a decade ago, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his son, Jack, paid a visit to the country where so many Americans were lost and where the senator himself was imprisoned under conditions so severe that he still bears today the impact of the torture he received there.  Yet, despite this history, he still traveled there freely, and Americans today enjoy cultural exchanges and tourism with Vietnam as they rightly have for years, benefitting both our countries.

A little more than a year ago, I spent a month traveling in Vietnam with my brother, and I loved it. Our father was lost in that war, which made the trip more compelling. So, there it is: from actual enemy with nearly 60,000 Americans killed in action, to trading partner and tourist destination. And not once did my government try to prevent me from traveling there. Both the United States and Vietnam are better off today because there is no travel ban.

I would like to make a similar trip to Cuba.

The travel ban also contradicts the lessons of history. For example, we never banned travel to the country that aided and armed our North Vietnam adversary and threatened us with nuclear armageddon during the Cold War: the Soviet Union. At the height of the Cold War, any American could visit the Soviet Union, including Russia. One could argue that travel reduced tensions between belligerents and added meaning to the saying, "Hold your friends close. Hold your enemies closer." One could also consider it is harder to lob a nuclear weapon at someone with whom you have exchanged orchestras, dancers, athletes and tourists. (Cuba, of course, poses essentially no military threat to the United States.)

Finally, let's talk about Iran. No American is prevented from traveling to this most historic land by his or her government, and Iran is a country that poses serious challenges to U.S. interests today and supplies weapons that are killing Americans in neighboring countries. This enlightened policy stands in stark contrast to that which we have toward Cuba, especially because it has been a long time since Cuba challenged the United States in such a way, or threatened to cut off shipping lanes to southern ports, or served as a Soviet outpost for air bases, missile fields or submarine pens. Americans can and should be able to travel to Iran, and they can and should also be able to travel to Cuba. The Iran policy makes sense; the Cuban policy does not.

This is a national-security issue under the rubric of common-sense engagement in our own area of national interest. We need to reestablish the right to allow Americans to travel 90 miles to engage with the culture that made Miami fun again. This is good for our country, good for the Cuban people and a smart policy for our national security.

Maj. Gen. Eaton is the National Security Network's senior adviser. He spent more than 30 years in the United States Army, where, from 2003-2004, he was the commanding general in charge of training Iraqi security forces.

###