Atlantic CouncilADRIENNE ARSHTLATIN AMERICA CENTERThe Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin AmericaCenter is dedicated to broadening awareness ofthe transformational political, economic, and socialchanges throughout Latin America. It is focused onbringing in new political, corporate, civil society, andacademic leaders to change the fundamental natureof discussions on Latin America and to develop newideas and innovative policy recommendations thathighlight the region’s potential as a strategic andeconomic partner for Europe, the United States, andbeyond. Founded through a gift from philanthropistand business leader Adrienne Arsht, the nonpartisanArsht Center began operations in October 2013.The Atlantic Council promotes constructive leadershipand engagement in international affairs based on thecentral role of the Atlantic Community in meetingglobal challenges. For more information, pleasevisit www.AtlanticCouncil.org.© 2014 The Atlantic Council of the United States. Allrights reserved. No part of this publication may bereproduced or transmitted in any form or by anymeans without permission in writing from the AtlanticCouncil, except in the case of brief quotations innews articles, critical articles, or reviews. Please directinquiries to:Atlantic Council1030 15th Street NW, 12th FloorWashington, DC 20005ISBN:978-1-61977-049-2February 11, 2014AcknowledgementsWe are grateful to the many people who wereinstrumental in the conceptualization of this poll andthe drafting of the report. At the Atlantic Council,Arsht Center Program Assistant Rachel DeLevie-Oreycontributed excellent insight and worked tirelesslyto ensure the seamless management of the manymoving parts of this project. Our Cuba project alsobenefited from the valuable contributions of otherArsht Center colleagues including Abby Moore,Thomas Corrigan, Natalie Alhonte, and Victor Salcedo.Taleen Ananian and Eric Gehman in the AtlanticCouncil’s external relations department as well as ourmedia consultant, AJ Ross, have provided us withinvaluable feedback and support. Donald Partyka, ourconsultant, designed the report.In addition to our internal team, we would like tothank the pollsters, Paul Maslin, Glen Bolger, and RickSklarz for carrying out an in-depth, groundbreakingbipartisan poll. We also would like to thank the manyCuba experts who provided invaluable advice.

USCUBAA New Public SurveySupports Policy Change

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeFOREWORDWhy is now the right moment tocommission a poll on the USpublic’s views toward Cuba andUS-Cuba relations? Why is a new,nonpartisan Latin America center reaching out tograb the third rail of Latin American foreign policyin the United States? Both good questions.Sometimes in foreign policy, structuralimpediments or stark policy differences will stymieprogress in a certain area. Relations with Chinacould not proceed until the United States recognizeda “one China” policy that forever downgraded USrelations with Taiwan. An activist foreign policywith Africa was impossible until the United Statesdenounced apartheid.Today, the United States has not one, buttwo structural problems with Latin America.Unfortunately, the United States will not be able toform strong partnerships in its own neighborhoodunless it addresses these long-standing issues.The first is immigration. The United Statesneeds to find a solution for the more than 11 millionundocumented immigrants residing within itsborders, most of whom arrived here from LatinAmerica. These immigrants’ plight in the UnitedStates is a continuing source of concern in theirhome countries.The second issue is Cuba. The injustice sufferedby Cuba’s refugees as they fled the country—their possessions and loved ones left behind—isimpossible to forget, whether they left this month orin 1959. Fifty-five years later, the Castro governmentcontinues to repress liberties, abuse human rights,and, despite some openings, deny its citizens accessto basic economic freedoms.Notwithstanding the many US efforts to promptregime change, the government of Cuba is firmly inplace, even surviving the transition of power fromFidel to Raúl Castro. It maintains widespread controlover virtually all aspects of daily life. Scores ofpolitical prisoners are sitting in Cuban jails. Amongthem is Alan Gross, a US citizen and US Agency forInternational Development subcontractor, serving afifteen-year prison sentence after his 2009 arrest oncharges of acts against the independence of the state.US-Cuba policy has largely remained stagnant fordecades. The question today is whether the UnitedStates should move in a new direction to achieve USpolicy goals.The Obama administration has made a series ofThis survey shows that the majority of Americanson both sides of the aisle areready for a policy shift.2 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy Changelaudable adjustments to US-Cuba policy, while theCuban government has taken slow steps to allowthe independent private sector to grow. Yet, in thepast weeks alone, prominent voices are increasinglyasking whether it is time to do more. One of themost important Cuban exile leaders, Alfonso Fanjul,recently said he was open to investing in Cubaunder the right circumstances. A traditionally toughsanctions supporter, former Florida Senator BobGraham visited Cuba in late January to discusscoordinating oil policy issues. Former FloridaGovernor Charlie Crist—now running again forgovernor—announced in early February hissupport for ending sanctions.The renewed attention to US-Cuba policyspurred the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Centerto commission this first comprehensive nationalpoll on the US-Cuba relationship to allow thebroader views of Americans to now be part of thepolicy debate. Given the results of the survey thatfollows, it is clearly time to take another look atthe dynamics of US-Cuba policy. This poll asks theAmerican people, and especially the Florida voters,who have played the largest role in formulatingCuba policy over the decades, if the moment hascome for a change.This survey shows that the majority ofAmericans on both sides of the aisle are ready fora policy shift. Most surprisingly, Floridians areeven more supportive than an already supportivenation to incrementally or fully change course.This is a key change from the past: Cuba used to beintractable because Florida was intractable. Thispoll argues that is no longer true.This is not the first time the Atlantic Councilhas sought to review US-Cuba policy. In 2007 theAtlantic Council Working Group on Cuba produceda roadmap for the initial restructuring of US-Cubanrelations. It offered twenty recommendations in sixareas (sanctions, leverage, international support,migration, transnational threats, and propertyclaims) with the goal being to reengage the UnitedStates in effectively influencing events in Cuba.The Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center iscommitted to highlighting Latin America’s potentialas a strategic and economic partner for Europe, theUnited States, and beyond. This requires strengtheningour relationships with the region. This pollamplifies the voice of the American people, themost important of all stakeholders, on an issue thatneeds to be reviewed, and the policies that have yetto be updated to reflect today’s new dynamics.Peter SchechterDirectorAdrienne Arsht Latin America CenterJason MarczakDeputy DirectorAdrienne Arsht Latin America CenterATLANTIC COUNCIL 3

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeTABLE OF CONTENTS5Main Findings7Methodology andAbout the Pollsters8The Poll In-depth24Policy Implications4 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeMAIN FINDINGSFor over fifty years, the United States hasimposed a comprehensive trade embargoagainst Cuba. This survey looks at whetherthere is overall support for normalizing USrelations (or, engaging more directly) with Cubaas well as changing individual aspects of US-Cubapolicy such as travel restrictions, trade and investmentopportunities, and diplomatic engagement.Respondents also were asked to respond to factualstatements about Cuba and react to arguments insupport or against the embargo. The poll carefullydocuments the demographics and political leaningsof the respondents.The NumbersAmajority of Americans from every regionand across party lines support normalizingrelations with Cuba. Nationwide, 56percent of respondents favor changing our Cubapolicy, with an increase to 63 percent among Floridaadults and 62 percent among Latinos [see Figure2, p.9]. Support is strongest among Democrats andIndependents, but 52 percent of Republicans alsofavor normalization [see Figure 5, p.11].Florida, home to the country’s largest Cuban-American population, leads the nation by 7percentage points in supporting normalizedrelations. In Miami-Dade County, where thehighest percentage of the state’s Cuban-Americanpopulation lives, support registers at 64 percent—as high as the overall state number [see Figure 13,p.23].Specific AlternativesMore than six in ten nationwide respondentswould like the policy to be changed toenable US companies to do more businessin Cuba and allow Americans to travel and spendmoney in Cuba without restrictions. Here again,Floridians and Latinos lead the nation in changingelements of the policy, with 67 percent of Floridaadults and 66 percent of Latinos in favor of removingall travel prohibitions [see Figure 7, p.13].Three-quarters of Americans and over eight inten Floridians would like the United States to holdmeetings with Cuban officials on issues of mutualconcern such as drug trafficking [see Figure 8,p.14].Cuba is one of only four countries designated asa state sponsor of terrorism—a list that includesIran, Syria, and Sudan. This designation restrictsUS foreign assistance, defense exports and sales,and select financial engagement. It also penalizespeople and countries engaging in certain trade withNationwide, 56 percent of respondents favorchanging the United States’ Cuba policy, with anincrease to 63 percent among Florida adults and 62percent among Latinos.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 5

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeFlorida, the state that allegedly has the greatestreluctance to reengage with Cuba, is now morewilling than an already supportive country.Cuba. Although this is US policy, 61 percent of theAmerican people believe that Cuba should not beconsidered a state sponsor of terrorism; in Florida,the number rises to 67 percent [see Figure 13,p.19].When asked whether the United States shouldestablish a special diplomatic envoy for Cuba, 61percent of both the nationwide respondents andFloridians agreed that this should be pursued [seeFigure 16, p.22]. The White House has the powerto appoint a special envoy for Cuba. An envoy isa position created to give high-level attention toa specific issue, and there are currently twelvespecial envoys serving in the State Department.Envoy positions range from a focus on Sudan andMiddle East peace to Eurasian energy.In the course of the poll, additional informationwas provided about Cuba, including a seriesof factual statements as well as viewpoints bythose who supported normalizing relations andthose against greater engagement. The reactionto these statements is provided in this report.Understandably, messages to keep current policy inplace resonated among the American people giventhe repressive policies of the Cuban government.When provided with alternatives, messagesin favor of changing our relations also resonated.After positive and negative messaging, a solidmajority of Americans (55 percent) continues tofavor changing US policy, with that number risingto 66 percent among Floridians and 61 percent forLatinos.The survey results indicate that Americans wanta change in US-Cuba policy. They have concernswith the Cuban government’s repression, butrecognize the need for alternatives in light of thefailure of the current policy to achieve its objective.And importantly, Florida, the state that allegedlyhas the greatest reluctance to reengage with Cuba,is now more willing than an already supportivecountry.6 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeMETHODOLOGY ANDABOUT THE POLLSTERSThe survey was conducted in English and Spanish from January 7 to January 22, 2014, with anationwide margin of error of +/- 3.1 percent (Florida, +/-4.0 percent and Latinos, +/-4.4 percent)at the 95 percent confidence interval. Respondents were interviewed on landlines and cell phones.In addition to a benchmark sample of 1,024 randomly-selected US adults age 18 and over, thesurvey includes additional oversamples with notable results from the 617 Florida residents and the 525Latinos interviewed.A bipartisan polling team of Paul Maslin and Glen Bolger conducted the survey.Paul Maslin is one of the leading observers ofpublic opinion and campaign strategists in thecountry. After a decade in Washington, DC, wherehe advised six presidential candidates, a dozenUS senators, and scores of governors, mayors andmembers of Congress, Maslin moved to Californiain 1989. In 1992, he joined Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin,Metz and Associates (FM3).Mr. Maslin has personally helped win manykey campaigns in both California and across thecountry in the past decade. In 2003–2004, he wasthe pollster and one of the key strategists in HowardDean’s groundbreaking run for president, whichopened new venues for grassroots organizingand fundraising. He worked for Governor BillRichardson in his 2008 presidential campaign.Mr. Maslin has also advised US Senators HerbKohl and Russ Feingold, and Mayors Bill White ofHouston, Tom Menino of Boston, and Tom Barrettof Milwaukee. He was a key strategist in all thecampaigns from 1998–2003 of former Governor GrayDavis of California.Glen Bolger is a partner and cofounder ofPublic Opinion Strategies and is one of theRepublican Party’s leading political strategists andpollsters. Bolger is the only pollster to be a threetimewinner of the “Republican Pollster of theYear” award. In 2010, Glen served as pollster for thesuccessful campaigns of five senators, one governor,and twenty-seven members of Congress. In addition,Glen served as the pollster for seven successfulmajor statewide Independent Expenditurecampaigns, as well as the largest IndependentExpenditure in the congressional races, workingin seventy-six congressional races, including fortynineof the seats Republicans took away fromDemocrats.Overall, Glen polled in fifty-three of the sixtythreeRepublican pick-up districts. Glen’s corporatepolling experience includes crisis managementpolling for some of the top issues in recent years, aswell as image and message work for major clientssuch as Wal-Mart, Bank of America, BlueCrossBlueShield of Florida, Tyson Foods, BNSF Railway,Catholic Health Association, Campaign for TobaccoFree Kids, and numerous Fortune 500 companies.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 7

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeTHE POLL IN-DEPTHThis section presents the responses to individual questions asked in the poll. Theseventeen figures in the following pages offer a comprehensive analysis of thefindings, though the full survey is available at: www.AtlanticCouncil.org/Cuba.Americans Rank Relationship withIran as Worse than with CubaFIGURE 1: Perception of US Diplomatic Relations with OtherNations■ No Relations (1–3)■ Neutral (4)■ Don’t Know (8)■ Close Relations (5–7)Mean ScoreDefinition:1=US has nodiplomaticrelations, trade ortravel with thatnation; 7=US has aclose relationshipwith that nation,with free and opentrade and travel.CUBANationwideMEAN SCORENo Relations 78% 7% 5% 10% 2.1State of Florida80% 6% 4% 10% 2.1Hispanics/Latinos78% 5% 3% 14% 2.0Iran71% 9% 7% 13% 2.4Vietnam44% Neutral 14% 7% 34% 3.8Mexico18% 10% 4%68% 5.2England6% 3.5%Close Relations 87% 6.33.5%Respondents were asked to rank the closeness of the United States’ relationship with various countriesusing a 1-7 scale. This question helped determine understanding of the current status of the UnitedStates’ international relationships. An overwhelming majority of people indicated very close ties toEngland, with a strong majority also ranking the US relationship with Iran as very weak, which signifiesbaseline knowledge of current status. Among the countries tested, respondents—nationwide as well asFloridians and Latinos—began the poll with an understanding that the United States had the poorestrelationship (which involves no diplomatic relations and a prohibition on trade and travel) with Cuba.8 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeFifty-Six Percent of Americans, and Over SixtyPercent of Floridians and Latinos Favor ChangingUS Policy toward CubaFIGURE 2: Support for Normalizing Relations or Engaging More Directlywith CubaNationwideTOTALOPPOSE35%9%State of Florida*TOTALOPPOSE30%6%Hispanics/LatinosTOTALOPPOSE30%7%22%Strongly Oppose30%Strongly Favor17%38%18%33%13%Somewhat Oppose 26%Somewhat Favor13%25%13%29%TOTALFAVOR56%TOTALFAVOR63%TOTALFAVOR62%■ Strongly Favor ■ Somewhat Favor*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.■ Somewhat Oppose ■ Strongly Oppose ■ Don’t Know/Not ApplicableFor decades the rhetoric around changing Cuba policy has been that Florida would neverlet it happen. The results from this poll challenge that long-held belief by putting Florida7 percentage points ahead of the nation in favoring normalization. Not only are Floridiansmore willing than a supportive nation for change, but they favor strongly favor normalizationby 8 percentage points more than the country as a whole. Latinos share near identical levelsof support. Floridians and Latinos are more likely to be well-educated on the issue of theUS-Cuba relationship because of geographic and personal ties. The numbers indicate that thecloser people are to the issue, the more likely they are to favor changing policy.Not only are Floridians more willing than asupportive nation for change, but they strongly favornormalization by 8 percentage points more than thecountry as a whole.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 9

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeMen are Significantly More Likely to Favor Changing CubaPolicy than WomenFIGURE 3: Normalize/Engage with Cuba by Gender■ Total Favor ■ Total Oppose ■ Don’t Know/Not ApplicableMen (49%)Women (51%)61% 32% 7%51% 38% 11%Men tend to be more comfortable with policy change in Cuba. This tends to be true across the policyspectrum with women generally showing a greater reluctance for change.Higher Education Means Greater Support forChanging PolicyFIGURE 4: Normalize/Engage with Cuba by Education■ Total Favor ■ Total Oppose ■ Don’t Know/Not ApplicableHigh School (26%)Some College* (27%)Four-Year College (34%)Post-Graduate (12%)14%DK/NA9%5%8%41%Total Oppose45%Total Favor34% 58%35%60%25%67%*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.As education levels increase, so does support for US engagement with Cuba. This points to a similar trendseen in the higher levels of support among Floridians and Latinos: the more a person knows about theissue, the more likely he or she is to support changing policy. While Floridians and Latinos are moreknowledgeable because of geographic proximity and heritage, people with higher education are likelybe better informed about the role of diplomatic and economic engagement and support normalizationaccordingly.10 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeSupport is Strongest Among Democrats, but the Majorityof Republicans Support ChangeFIGURE 5: Normalize/Engage with Cuba by Party■ Total Favor ■ Total Oppose ■ Don’t Know/Not Applicable (DK/NA)Democrats (37%)Independents (25%)Republicans (28%)Not Registered (6%)9%DK/NA10%7%12%31%Total Oppose60%Total Favor30%60%41% 52%42%46%Much like with the results from Florida, this breakdown challenges previous conceptionsthat US-Cuba policy issues are split across party lines. While support for changing policy iscertainly more prevalent among Democrats and Independents, the majority of self-identifiedRepublicans favor normalization. With increasing bipartisan support for normalization,politicians from both sides of the aisle should be less likely to fear a popular backlash againsttheir support of policy change. When discussing the changing rhetoric around US-Cubanrelations these numbers were some of the most important in understanding the trend ofpublic opinion.While support for changing policy is certainly moreprevalent among Democrats and Independents,the majority of self-identified Republicans favornormalization.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 11

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeMore than Six in Ten People Want all EconomicRestrictions LiftedFIGURE 6: Respondents were asked if they supported or opposed fivepossible ways to change US policy toward Cuba. Figures 6, 7, and 8illustrate their responses.POLICY OPTION 1: Allowing more American companies to do business in CubaNationwideTOTALSState of FloridaTOTALS40% 23% 63%Strongly Support 35% Somewhat 27% 62%21% 11% 32%Strongly Oppose Somewhat24% 12% 36%Hispanics/Latinos20% 12% 32%40% 25% 65%POLICY OPTION 2: Removing restrictions on US citizens to spend dollars in CubaNationwideTOTALSState of FloridaTOTALS40% 23% 63%Strongly Support 35% Somewhat 26% 61%19% 13% 32%Strongly Oppose Somewhat22% 13% 35%■ Strongly Support ■ Somewhat SupportHispanics/Latinos38% 29% 67%18% 11% 29%■ Somewhat Oppose ■ Strongly OpposeA common sense majority of Americans responded that they would support normalizingrelations with Cuba. This number jumps to even higher levels of support, reaching wellinto the 60 percent range, when asked about specific policy changes that could ultimatelyput the United States and Cuba on a path to normalization. Figure 6 shows that a strongmajority of the US public, including Floridians and Latinos, would like to see the removal ofeconomic restrictions. Florida residents and Latinos tended to have slightly higher levels ofsupport for most of these changes in keeping with their overall levels of support.12 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeStrong Support Exists for Alleviating Travel RestrictionsFIGURE 7: Respondents were asked if they supported or opposed five possibleways to change US policy toward Cuba. Figures 6, 7, and 8 illustrate their responses.POLICY OPTION 3: Removing all restrictions on travel to Cuba by US citizensNationwideTOTALS State of FloridaTOTALS38% 29% 67%Strongly Support 35% Somewhat 25% 61%*18% 12% 29%*StronglyOppose20%Somewhat16% 36%Hispanics/Latinos16% 15% 31%37% 29% 66%POLICY OPTION 4: Allowing Cuba access to high-speed Internet and othertelecommunications systems based in the United StatesNationwideTOTALSStrongly Support29% Somewhat 23% 52%State of Florida19% 9% 28%TOTALS39% 25% 64%Strongly Oppose27%Somewhat16% 43%Hispanics/Latinos30% 25% 55%18% 15% 33%■ Strongly Support ■ Somewhat Support■ Somewhat Oppose ■ Strongly Oppose*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.Non-Cuban US citizens are barred from traveling to Cuba without government permission, whileCuban-Americans may visit freely without a special visa. This is the only country in the world withwhich the United States has this policy of restricting certain US citizens and not others. Still, theCuban authorities report that over 98,000 US citizens traveled to Cuba in 2012 (after obtaining USvisas) and although not reported in Cuba’s tourism statistics, it is estimated that an additional350,000 Cuban-Americans visited Cuba in that year. These numbers reflect a small percentage ofthe potential number of US tourists if all travel restrictions were lifted—a policy option that issupported by 61 percent of US adults, 67 percent of Floridians, and 66 percent of Latinos.While the US public is in favor of allowing access to high-speed Internet and telecommunications,their enthusiasm for this policy change is not as strong as observed for other options. This couldreflect a general sense of unease around data security issues.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 13

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeThree-Quarters of Americans Favor DiplomaticCoordination on Issues of Mutual ConcernFIGURE 8: Respondents were asked if they supported or opposed fivepossible ways to change US policy toward Cuba. Figures 6, 7, and 8illustrate their responses.POLICY OPTION 5: Holding meetings with the Cuban government to coordinate onissues of mutual concern, like preventing drug trafficking and smugglingNationwideTOTALOPPOSE20%6%SomewhatOppose21%SomewhatSupport14%StronglyOppose56%StronglySupportState of FloridaTOTALOPPOSE15%TOTALSUPPORT82%11%4%20%Hispanics/LatinosTOTALOPPOSE 12%6%18%62%19% 61%TOTALSUPPORT77%TOTALSUPPORT80%■ Strongly Support ■ Somewhat Support■ Somewhat Oppose ■ Strongly OpposeRespondents were asked if they supported coordinating with the Cuban government onissues of mutual concern, such as preventing drug trafficking and smuggling. Such high levelsof support indicate people’s desire to prioritize issues of concern to the United States and toengage in the most productive way possible to protect US interests. Throughout history theUnited States has worked with unsavory nations to strategically manage those issues mostimportant to this country. There is clear demand for the United States to do the same withCuba.There is a clear desire to prioritize issues of concernto the United States and to engage in the mostproductive way possible to protect US interests.14 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeNormalize/EngageKeep“Ninety Miles Away” and Travel Restrictions areCompelling Logic for EngagementFIGURE 9: Respondents were read factual statements about the UnitedStates and Cuba and asked if they considered each statement a reasonto normalize relations or keep current policy in place. Figures 9, 10, and 11illustrate their responses.STATEMENT 1: Cuba is only ninety miles away from the US mainland.NationwideVery Important 38%Very Important23% Somewhat12% 35%TOTALSSomewhat20% 58%State of Florida23% 14% 37%Hispanics/Latinos20% 15% 35%TOTALS41% 17% 59%*38% 22% 61%*Normalize/EngageKeepSTATEMENT 2: Our government only allows Cuban-Americans to travelto Cuba without permission. If you are not Cuban-American, the USTreasury Department must approve your travel. We do not do that withany other country.NationwideTOTALSVery Important 37% Somewhat 21% 58%Very Important21% Somewhat15% 36%State of FloridaTOTALS33% 26% 59%21% 16% 37%Hispanics/Latinos18% 17% 35%37% 23% 60%■ Very Important to Normalize/Engage■ Somewhat Important■ Very Important to Keep Current Policy■ Somewhat Important*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to roundingWhen told that Cuba was only ninety miles off the coast of Florida, or when it was sharedthat US travel policy with Cuba is unique in the world, approximately six in ten peoplesaid this was an important reason to normalize relations. The majority of those who sawthe statement as justification to engage with Cuba considered it a “very important” reason(not just “somewhat important”), indicating the intensity of desire for change.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 15

Normalize/EngageKeepUS-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeEconomic Policy is Particularly Important to Latinosamong Reasons to EngageFIGURE 10: Respondents were read factual statements about the UnitedStates and Cuba, and asked if they considered each statement a reasonto normalize relations or keep current policy in place. Figures 9, 10, and 11illustrate their responses.STATEMENT 3: The Cuba trade embargo is estimated to cost the US economyas much as $4.8 billion in exports and related economic output per year.NationwideTOTALSVery Important 36% Somewhat 21% 56%*Very Important22%Somewhat16% 38%State of FloridaTOTALS35% 23% 57%*19% 17% 37%*Hispanics/Latinos16% 14% 30%42% 21% 63%■ Very Important to Normalize/Engage■ Somewhat Important■ Very Important to Keep Current Policy■ Somewhat Important*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.Latinos are 7 percentage points ahead of the nation in considering the economic impact ofthe embargo to be a reason to open relations with Cuba. The US Latino community had beenparticularly hard hit by the downturn of the US economy—a potential reason for its supportof any policy change that could yield additional economic opportunities. Across the board theresults show strong support for normalization among those who found this statement to be animportant reason to change policy.The results show strong support for normalizationamong those who found the economic cost of theembargo to be an important reason to change policy.16 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeThe Castros’ Human Rights Record is a Strong Deterrent toChanging PolicyFIGURE 11: Respondents were read factual statements about the UnitedStates and Cuba, and asked if they considered each statement a reasonto normalize relations or keep current policy in place. Figures 9, 10, and 11illustrate their responses.STATEMENT 4: Cuba continues to have a dismal human rights record.The Castro regime represses virtually all forms of political dissent throughdetentions, arbitrary arrests, beatings, travel restrictions, forced exile, andsentencing dissidents in closed trials.Normalize/EngageKeepNationwideVery Important 26%Very Important 33%TOTALSSomewhat17% 43%Somewhat17% 50%State of FloridaTOTALS28% 17% 45%32% 17% 49%Hispanics/Latinos26% 21% 47%29% 16% 45%STATEMENT 5: After more than fifty years of no US relations with Cuba theCastro regime remains in power.Normalize/EngageKeepNationwideVery Important23%TOTALSSomewhat18% 41%Very Important 30% Somewhat 21% 51%State of FloridaTOTALS25% 18% 43%34% 18% 51%*Hispanics/Latinos28% 24% 52%26% 16% 41%*■ Very Important to Normalize/Engage■ Somewhat Important■ Very Important to Keep Current Policy■ Somewhat Important*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.Most Americans consider Cuba’s abysmal human rights record under Fidel and now Raúl Castroa reason to keep current policy. The original intention of the embargo was to isolate the countrythrough comprehensive economic sanctions. Though the embargo has failed to isolate Cuba, themajority of Americans and Floridians believe that the Castros remaining in power fifty years later is areason to keep current policy. Latinos, however, see the continuation of the Castro regime as a reasonto normalize. They are also potentially slightly more inclined to change policy in light of the humanrights situation.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 17

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeHalf the Nation and over Sixty Percent of Floridians DoNot Think Cuba Belongs on the US Terrorism ListFIGURE 12: Support for Cuba Remaining on the State Sponsors of TerrorismListNationwide*State of Florida8%7%DK/NA31%61%40%Yes:Belongson the List52%No:Does NotBelong onthe ListHispanics/Latinos*6%50%43%■ Yes: Same threat as other terrorist designated countries and thus belongs on the list■ No: Not the same threat as other terrorist designated countries and thus does not belong on the list■ Don’t Know/Not Applicable (DK/NA)*Totals do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding.An understanding of the details of Cuba politics proves to be a governing factorin the results of this question. Respondents were told: “Currently, the US StateDepartment designates four countries in the world as state-sponsors of terrorism:Cuba, Iran, Syria, and Sudan. The State Department defines state sponsorsof terrorism as countries that have repeatedly provided support for acts ofinternational terrorism, and places sanctions on these nations that restrict trade,travel, and foreign assistance.” Respondents were then asked to decide accordinglyif Cuba deserved such a status: “In your opinion, does Cuba pose the same threatas these other countries—Sudan, Syria, and Iran—and thus belong on the list?”With a foreign policy centered around a war on terror the nation is somewhatsqueamish about removing Cuba from the terror list. Those closest to the issue(Floridians) were more likely to distinguish between the threat that Cuba poses tothe United States and that of the other three nations.18 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeWhen Given More Information a SignificantNumber of People Believe Cuba Does Not Belongon the Terrorism ListFIGURE 13: Influence of Additional Information on Cuba Remaining on theState Sponsors of Terrorism ListNationwideState of Florida9%DK/NA9%24%30%Yes:Belongson the List67%Hispanics/Latinos61%No:Does NotBelong onthe List7%34%59%■ Yes: Same threat as other terrorist designated countries and thus belongs on the list■ No: Not the same threat as other terrorist designated countries and thus does not belong on the list■ Don’t Know/Not Applicable (DK/NA)After the initial question about whether Cuba belonged on the State Sponsors ofTerrorism List respondents were provided additional information: “Thousandsof Al-Qaeda terrorists are in Sudan or Syria, and Iran has been aggressivelybuilding its nuclear program. Despite human rights abuses, Cuba poses noneof the active dangers to the United States and our security that these othercountries possess.” The same question was then asked (as for Figure 12) butwith a dramatic shift in those who believe that Cuba does not pose the samethreat as the other nations on the list. An important takeaway is the tendency tobe in favor of changing policy with even more information on the topic.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 19

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeEconomic Arguments Prove to be Most Convincingfor NormalizationFIGURE 14: Reaction to Statements in Support of NormalizationStatementsTRADELatin America is the United States’ fastest growingtrading partner. Cuba, just ninety miles off the FloridaCoast, provides new opportunities for Americanbusinesses in all types of industries—agriculture, hotelsand tourism, and high-tech—that will help grow the USeconomy and create new jobs in America.HURTFor fifty years, the US embargo has hurt the people ofCuba, not the government. Changing our policy willhelp the Cuban people out of severe poverty, and wecan continue to be tough on the Castro regime andhold it accountable for human rights abuses.VIETNAMToday we have good diplomatic relations with Vietnam,including open travel and free trade. If we are willingto talk to and work with a country we went to war with,surely it is time to reevaluate our outdated Cuba policy.CHANGEAs with communism in Eastern Europe or dictatorshipsin the Middle East, Cuba’s government will eventuallychange. It is better for the US to engage more directlywith Cuba now so we are in better position to respondto that change instead of waiting to respond to chaos,like what is happening in Egypt, just ninety miles fromour shores.FLORIDAFor too long, politicians have allowed Florida to controlUS foreign policy. It is time to set our Cuba policybased on what is best for America’s overall nationalsecurity and economic interests.Nationwide State of Florida Hispanics/LatinosVery/SomewhatConvincingVery/SomewhatConvincingVery/SomewhatConvincing65% 69% 71%64% 64% 65%61% 57% 66%57% 62% 64%56% 58% 66%Respondents were read a series of statements made by those in favor of normalization. They werethen asked whether each argument was very convincing, somewhat convincing, not convincing, orif they didn’t believe it. Those who considered the statements to be very and somewhat convincingare depicted in this chart. Much like when asked about possible policy changes, people were mostresponsive to the economic elements of this argument, believing that new business opportunitieswere a convincing reason to change current policy. As with the question that addressed the loss ofbusiness due to the embargo, Latinos lead the nation in finding this a particularly important reasonto normalize relations.20 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeReasons for Maintaining the Embargo also ReceiveSupport Across the BoardFIGURE 15: Reaction to Statements in Opposition to NormalizationStatementsWEAKENEnding the embargo before the Cuban governmentmeets the conditions specified would weakenthe United States. Changing our policy would senda message to Iran, North Korea, and other countriesthat they can act against American interests withno consequences.CUBAN-AMERICANSCuban-Americans support current US policy becauseit puts economic pressure on the Castro regime, whileproviding assistance to Cuban citizens. Travel andfinancial restrictions have already been lifted for Cuban-Americans to help their families; meanwhile we shouldstay tough on the Castro regime.WORKINGNow is not the time to lift sanctions as the embargo isweakening the Cuban government. Keeping existingpolicies in place will help bring down the Castro regime,like our tough stance against communism helped bringdown the Berlin Wall.Nationwide State of Florida Hispanics/LatinosVery/SomewhatConvincingVery/SomewhatConvincingVery/SomewhatConvincing51% 52% 58%61% 67% 61%54% 52% 54%Respondents were read statements made by those in favor of maintaining current US policy.Similiar to Figure 14, they were then asked whether each argument was very convincing,somewhat convincing, not convincing, or if they didn’t believe it. Unsurprisingly, in Florida, a statewhere approximately seven in ten Cuban-Americans live, people found the argument that invokesCuban-Americans and their status to be particularly persuasive in keeping US policy. The previousquestion, which listed reasons in favor of ending the embargo, along with the question on thestate sponsors of terrorism, both point to the power of information and messaging. A majority ofpeople were convinced by the pro-normalization arguments, and then a slightly smaller majority—but a majority, nonetheless—also were swayed by the pro-embargo arguments.In Florida, people found the argument that invokesCuban-Americans and their status to be particularlypersuasive in keeping US policy.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 21

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeSixty Percent of the Country Supports aSpecial Envoy for CubaFIGURE 16: Support for a Special Envoy for CubaNationwideState of Florida7%DK/NA32%7%61%32%No/Do Not Sendan Envoy 61%Yes/Send an EnvoyHispanics/Latinos8%33% 59%Respondents were told: “The United States often establishes a special diplomaticposition, called an envoy, for countries that we have hostile or tense relationshipswith, like North Korea, Sudan, and the Congo.” When asked if the United Statesshould appoint a special envoy for Cuba, 61 percent of the nation believed this is aworthwhile policy to pursue. A majority of Latinos also agreed.The Obama administration has utilized the role of the special envoy and specialrepresentative more than any other previous administration, with twelve specialenvoys currently serving in the State Department. These roles exist for the purposeof being able to engage in productive relations through a high-level post in lieuof an in-country ambassador. By creating this position for Cuba the United Statescould avoid any tacit approval associated with an ambassador, yet still negotiate therelationship between the two countries.22 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeSixty-Four Percent of Miami-Dade CountyFavors NormalizationFIGURE 17: Florida Support for Normalizing Relations or Engaging MoreDirectly with CubaArea/RegionTotalFavorTotalOpposeDon’t Know/Not ApplicablePercent ofFlorida SampleMiami-Dade County 64% 30% 6% 13%Broward & Palm BeachCounties64% 33% 4% 16%South Florida 64% 32% 5% 29%I-4 Corridor 60% 32% 8% 24%Atlantic Coast 69% 24% 7% 14%Gulf Coast 64% 28% 9% 15%Panhandle 58% 37% 5% 11%North/South Central 73% 24% 3% 6%As previously noted, Florida leads the nation in favoring normalization. This is not just incertain areas of the state: every single region is ahead of the national average, some by 17percentage points. One of the most notable, however, is Miami-Dade County, the unofficialcapital of Cuban-Americans. A long-held belief is that this county is the bastion of proembargosupport; yet, 64 percent of Miami-Dade County favors changing US-Cuba policy.This number is one of the most crucial in challenging assumptions and understandingthe new support for changing US policy.A long-held belief is that Miami-Dade County is thebastion of pro-embargo support; yet 64 percent ofrespondents favor changing US-Cuba policy.ATLANTIC COUNCIL 23

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangePOLICY IMPLICATIONSCuba, an island nation of 11 million people,has become a boulder-sized pebble inthe shoes of US relations with a region ofover 580 million people. More than fivedecades after it was first implemented, the Cubaembargo is hampering the United States’ ability tomaximize cooperation with allies in the hemisphereat a moment when there is increasing stability,growth, and opportunity.US policy toward Cuba—a web of laws andregulations designed to force regime change inHavana—has not produced its intended resultsas Fidel Castro maintained power for five decades,and, in 2006, successfully transferred power toRaúl Castro. The Cuban government is also notwholly isolated from the United States. Select USagricultural commodities and medicine/medicaldevices are regularly exported to the island underan exemption to the embargo passed by Congress in2000. It is also estimated that approximately a halfmillion US visitors traveled to Cuba last year.Nor is Cuba sequestered from the rest of theworld. In January 2014, for example, Havana hostedthe United Nations and Organization of AmericanStates (OAS) secretaries general (Cuba’s suspensionfrom the OAS ended in 2009) and presidents ofall Latin American nations for the Community ofLatin American and Caribbean States Summit. TheEuropean Union, which introduced sanctions afterthe Cuban government rounded up seventy-fivedissidents in 2003, lifted its sanctions in 2008. Thiswas done to encourage change in Cuba after RaúlCastro took over as head of the government. OnFebruary 10, 2014, the European Union—Cuba’sbiggest foreign investor—agreed to launchnegotiations with Cuba to increase dialogue ontrade, investment, and human rights issues.The embargo has become the Cubangovernment’s “enabler.” Cuba today enjoysthe benefits of increasing political supportin the region, growing financial integrationwith much of the world, and the largesse ofpolitically-compatible neighbors while makingfew concessions to its own people. Rather thanaccelerating an end to the Castro brothers’ regime,the embargo has become the all-encompassingexcuse for inaction on the island. Cubans remainrepressed, controlled, and largely unable to forgetheir own destinies.Latin America is the United States’ fastestgrowing trade partner. As Mexican PresidentEnrique Peña Nieto likes to point out, a billiondollars of trade passes through the US-Mexicoborder every day. But our allies in the region arefinding it increasingly difficult to defend our Cubapolicy.These regional allies point out that the UnitedStates negotiates with Iran. The president ofVietnam, a country with which the United Stateswent to war and continues to be a one-party state,was welcomed to the White House in July 2013 andis now a negotiating partner in the Trans-PacificPartnership trade agreement. It is true that theCuban government represses freedoms, but theUnited States engages with unsavory governmentsall the time. Why, they ask, is it that the UnitedStates refuses to talk to a country ninety miles offthe coast of Florida?At the same time, Latin America has mostlymoved on. Even the United States’ stalwartally, Colombia, is holding peace talks with theRevolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia—a24 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy ChangeWhile those opposing any change have muchemotion and determination on their side, it is clearthat demography and immigration have changed theequation of Florida politics.guerrilla group waging war against the state sincethe 1960s—in Havana. In the meantime, the UnitedStates continues to support policies that make itharder to support Cuba’s emerging independentprivate sector and civil society. Notwithstandingrecent changes to policy, US allies in the regionfind it difficult to defend the US embargo. They areforced to segregate meetings to accommodate theUnited States. Latin American countries are unitedin insisting that the next Summit of the Americasin 2016 will include Cuba, even if that means theUnited States will not participate.The Obama administration has made a seriesof laudable adjustments to US Cuba policy. In2009, it lifted all restrictions on family travel andremittances and it put in place new measures toease travel restrictions and to allow Americans tosend remittances to Cuba in 2011. Now, Americanscan travel to Cuba for religious and educationaltravel under people-to-people licenses and at leastnineteen US airports offer direct flights.This poll shows the Obama administrationshould expand on those changes and further itscommitment to increasing support for the Cubanpeople.The policy implications of this poll are farranging:1Profound changes to US-Cuba policywould be well received by the Americanpeople, and even more so, by Floridiansand Latinos. Fifty-six percent of Americansagree with the wholesale proposition that theUnited States need to normalize relations (furtherengage) with Cuba. In Florida, that number jumpsto 63 percent support, and among Latinos, 62percent. Over and over, the poll points to repeatedinstances where the American people—by upto three to one in some cases—support change.Americans may not know all the details. They maynot be experts on the intricacies of the overlappingset of federal regulations known as the Cuba sanctions.But Americans know that Cuba is not a friendof the United States—characterizing US-Cubarelations as worse than those with Iran—and areaware that the Cuban government violates thebasic rights of its own people. Still, they believethat a policy in place since the early 1960s is notworking and support alternatives.2Steps that could largely be takenby the White House to increase itspolicy of support for the Cubanpeople yield even more supportthan a wholesale ending of the embargo.This fits neatly with political reality. Americanswant change, but they are more comfortableproceeding piece-by-piece. When asked aboutchanging the specifics of the policy, Americans areeven more supportive. Whether it is changing thetravel ban, amending financial restrictions, meetingwith the Cuban government to discuss matters ofcommon interest, or removing Cuba from the listof state sponsors of terrorism, support for changingthe individual policies rises above 61 percent.Over 80 percent of Floridians and Latinos say theUnited States should talk with Cuban authoritieson issues of mutual concern such as preventingdrug trafficking.Americans clearly agree—almost three toATLANTIC COUNCIL 25

US-Cuba: A New Public Survey Supports Policy Changeone—with messages that communicate compellingreasons to change the policy. Yet, even after hearingthese messages, they prefer incremental steps oversupporting a wholesale change in policy. Sincethere is little chance of removing in its entirety thecongressionally mandated web of laws, Americansare telling President Obama that he is free tofurther expand the boundaries of engagementas long as this is done in tandem with a strongadvocacy for human rights.3Florida actually leads the nation inclamoring for a new direction. Thispoll overturns decades of widely-acceptedconventional wisdom. Political leaderswho push for an easing of restrictions should notfear a backlash from Floridians and their viewsshould no longer be an impediment to changing USpolicy toward Cuba. For decades, Florida’s politicstrumped national policy. This is no longer true.While those opposing any change have much emotionand determination on their side, it is clear thatdemography and immigration have changed theequation of Florida politics. Second- and third-generationCuban-Americans today make up a smallerpart of the state’s Latino population. Young Cuban-Americans are rightly proud of their heritage, andcontinue to acknowledge the Cuban government’srepression. However, they also believe that thepolicies of the last five decades have not worked.This is reflected in their views on Cuba policy. Thispoll demonstrates that national politicians couldactually gain by acknowledging today’s new realitiesand changing Cuba policy to meet them. This isconsistent with President Obama’s support amongCuban-Americans in 2012, when exit polls showed aplurality backed his reelection.4The majority of Americans supportfurther policies that ease restrictionson travel, spending moneyin Cuba, and the ability of the USprivate sector to do business in Cuba.Limitations have been eased in the past few yearsbut more could be done. Over 60 percent of the USpublic favor lifting travel restrictions and greaterfinancial engagement with Cuba. Among Latinos,the number jumps to over 65 percent. Still, evenmore support is seen among Floridians (67 percent)for a complete abolishment of the currenttravel policy.Greater financial engagement would also helpto unleash the new wave of small, independentbusinesses on the island that began to openthrough a change in Cuban government policy in2010. These businesses are clamoring for start-upcapital and represent great potential for the Cubanpeople to increase their independence from theCuban government. Most of all, over two-thirdsof Americans believe that we must open up adialogue with the Cuban government on issues ofmutual concern such as terrorism, narcotrafficking,environmental safety, and resource management.Bilateral cooperation and dialogue is critical for thesafety of both countries.5The Obama administration hasa considerable number of toolsto use should it want to followthe careful recommendationsof Americans, including removing Cubafrom the terrorism list and naming a specialenvoy for Cuba. Removing Cuba from theterrorism list is a top priority, with 67 percent ofFloridians and 61 percent of Americans overallin support. Cuba’s government is repressive anddictatorial, but Cuba does not belong on a list nextto Iran or Sudan. In fact, keeping Cuba on the listactually makes it harder to provide support for theCuban people. The United States talks to governmentswith reprehensible policies (that are not onthe terrorism list) regularly and is even involvedin a negotiation process with Iran over its nuclearprogram. At the same time, however, the UnitedStates should also insist that Cuban governmentreciprocates any overtures, including by freeingAlan Gross. Naming a special envoy for Cuba—amove supported by 61 percent of Americans—would show that the Obama administration isready for deeper engagement with the island.26 ATLANTIC COUNCIL

Atlantic Council Board of DirectorsCHAIRMAN*Jon M. Huntsman, Jr.CHAIRMAN,INTERNATIONALADVISORY BOARDBrent ScowcroftPRESIDENT AND CEO*Frederick KempeVICE CHAIRS*Robert J. Abernethy*Richard Edelman*C. Boyden Gray*Richard L. Lawson*Virginia A. Mulberger*W. DeVier Pierson*John StudzinskiTREASURER*Brian C. McK.HendersonSECRETARY*Walter B. SlocombeDIRECTORSStephane AbrialOdeh AburdenePeter AckermanTimothy D. AdamsJohn Allen*Michael AnsariRichard L. Armitage*Adrienne ArshtDavid D. AufhauserElizabeth F. BagleyRalph BahnaSheila Bair*Rafic Bizri*Thomas L. BlairJulia Chang BlochFrancis BouchardMyron Brilliant*R. Nicholas Burns*Richard R. BurtMichael CalveyJames E. CartwrightAhmed CharaiWesley K. ClarkJohn CraddockDavid W. CraigTom Craren*Ralph D. Crosby, Jr.Thomas M. CulliganNelson CunninghamIvo H. DaalderGregory R. Dahlberg*Paula J. DobrianskyChristopher J. DoddConrado DornierPatrick J. DurkinThomas J. EdelmanThomas J. Egan, Jr.*Stuart E. EizenstatJulie FinleyLawrence P. Fisher, IIAlan H. FleischmannMichèle Flournoy*Ronald M. Freeman*Robert S. Gelbard*Sherri W. Goodman*Stephen J. HadleyMikael HagströmIan HagueFrank HaunRita E. HauserMichael V. HaydenAnnette HeuserMarten H.A. van HeuvenJonas HjelmKarl HopkinsRobert Hormats*Mary L. HowellRobert E. HunterWolfgang IschingerReuben Jeffery, IIIRobert Jeffrey*James L. Jones, Jr.George A. JoulwanStephen R. KappesMaria Pica KarpFrancis J. Kelly, Jr.Zalmay M. KhalilzadRobert M. KimmittHenry A. KissingerPeter KovarcikFranklin D. KramerPhilip LaderDavid LevyHenrik Liljegren*Jan M. Lodal*George Lund*John D. MacomberIzzat MajeedWendy W. MakinsMian M. ManshaWilliam E. MayerEric D.K. MelbyFranklin C. Miller*Judith A. Miller*Alexander V. MirtchevObie L. Moore*George E. MooseGeorgette MosbacherBruce MoslerThomas R. NidesFranco NuscheseSean O’KeefeHilda Ochoa-BrillembourgAhmet OrenAna PalacioThomas R. Pickering*Andrew ProzesArnold L. PunaroKirk A. RadkeJoseph W. RalstonTeresa M. ResselJeffrey A. RosenCharles O. RossottiStanley O. RothRobert RowlandHarry SachinisWilliam O. SchmiederJohn P. SchmitzAnne-Marie SlaughterAlan J. SpenceJohn M. Spratt, Jr.James StavridisRichard J.A. SteeleJames B. Steinberg*Paula SternRobert J. StevensJohn S. TannerPeter J. Tanous*Ellen O. TauscherKaren TramontanoClyde C. TugglePaul TwomeyMelanne VerveerEnzo ViscusiCharles F. WaldJay WalkerMichael F. WalshMark R. WarnerJ. Robinson WestJohn C. WhiteheadDavid A. WilsonMaciej WituckiMary C. YatesDov S. ZakheimHONORARYDIRECTORSDavid C. AchesonMadeleine K. AlbrightJames A. Baker, IIIHarold BrownFrank C. Carlucci, IIIRobert M. GatesMichael G. MullenWilliam J. PerryColin L. PowellCondoleezza RiceEdward L. RownyJames R. SchlesingerGeorge P. ShultzJohn W. WarnerWilliam H. WebsterLIFETIME DIRECTORSCarol C. AdelmanLucy Wilson BensonDaniel J. Callahan, IIIBrian DaileyKenneth W. DamLacey Neuhaus DornStanley EbnerChas W. FreemanCarlton W. Fulford, Jr.Edmund P. Giambastiani, Jr.John A. GordonBarbara HackmanFranklinRobert L. HutchingsRoger KirkGeraldine S. KunstadterJames P. MccarthyJack N. MerrittPhilip A. OdeenWilliam Y. SmithMarjorie ScardinoWilliam H. Taft, IVRonald P. VerdicchioCarl E. VuonoTogo D. West, Jr.R. James Woolsey* Executive Committee MembersList as of January 17, 2014

The Atlantic Council is a nonpartisan organization that promotes constructiveUS leadership and engagement in international affairs based on the central roleof the Atlantic community in meeting today’s global challenges.1030 15th Street, NW, 12th Floor, Washington, DC 20005(202) 778-4952, www.AtlanticCouncil.org

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines