In the long-standing stalemate between the U.S. and Cuba, the U.S. has prided itself in always taking the �moral high road.� It�s about time we actually made a move that reflected such integrity.

It is especially crucial to begin dialogue with Cuba at this moment because of the change of power from Fidel to Raul Castro. At present, Cuba is certainly not �Castro-ated,� but it won�t be long until it is. When that time comes, the U.S. needs to have already been in communication with the next generation of communists. If we wait for a post-Castro Cuba to begin negotiations, it will have been too late.

Francisco Scarano, a UW professor specializing in Caribbean history, believes softening the embargo at the very least would push Cuba�s administration to cooperate with ideas of a market economy and political pluralism.

Although Raul may not be immediately willing to negotiate, the Cuban communists who would take power in the post-Castro era will most definitely see things differently. They understand the Cuban people�s desire for a system of social mobility and a market economy. Remembering that Raul is already 76 years of age and that Castro hasn�t made a public appearance since his surgery over a year and a half ago, now is not too early to begin negotiations.

Presidents of both the past and present have affected Cuba, but it is certain that our next president will be more vital than any of the 10 other presidents the United States has had throughout Castro�s rule. That person�s initial ideology in the post-Castro void will determine what relationship we have with Cuba.

During the Clinton presidency, U.S. foreign policy was influenced by the relationship created between President Clinton and south Florida exiles. This was especially true with Jorge Mas Canosa, the founder of the Cuban American National Foundation, a non-profit, anti-Castro Cuban exile organization. Unfortunately, this relationship deterred Mr. Clinton from any possibility of softening the trade embargo.

The Bush administration has been slightly less constrained. Mr. Bush has angered many Cuban Americans by greatly restricting travel to Cuba. However, his administration has begun normalization of food and medicine, pleasing many American farmers who sell a substantial amount of food to Cuban buyers.

Most importantly though, it is imperative we consider Cuba in our own presidential race. Shortly following Castro�s announcement of resignation, all candidates commented on the steps that needed to be taken, yet Barack Obama was the only candidate to mention the softening or lifting of the embargo.

Many people perceive the U.S.�s offering to soften the embargo as a sign of weakness or as �giving in� to Cuba�s demands. It is actually quite the opposite.

By making the first move, or the first attempts at constructive conversation, the U.S. will actually retain the upper hand in the long run. This is not a situation similar to that of Iran, where there are threats or fears of destructive weapons. We are not, and hopefully will not, be at war with Cuba. The U.S. simply needs to have the ambition and nobility to be the first to negotiate with Cuba.

The younger, post-Castro leaders of Cuba realize that a change in their country�s political policy is essential, and they would be easily persuaded to shift to Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez�s system of democratic socialism if the U.S. refrains from negotiating.

Fidel Castro is an intelligent man who may have made his smartest move yet by resigning. The U.S. needs to remember that Cuba, its communist administration and especially the Castros are not ones to be bullied and that its leaders are not foolish. The U.S. cannot tell the Cubans what they should do, but rather can tell them what the U.S. is willing to do. The first thing that needs to be discussed is the lifting of an antiquated trade embargo. I�d say we have a little catching up to do.

Julia Chapman ([email protected]) is a sophomore majoring in journalism and Spanish.