Mondino can’t say it wasn’t beforehand. Milea’s speech at the September General Assembly it was a resounding declaration that the defense of freedom worldwide would henceforth be a pillar of his country’s foreign policy. “From this day,” he said, “know that the Republic of Argentina will abandon the position of historical neutrality that has characterized us and will be at the forefront of the fight for the defense of freedom.” He chastised the world body for allowing “bloody dictatorships like Cuba and Venezuela to join the Human Rights Council”. If Argentina’s foreign minister didn’t get the message, she wasn’t paying attention.

Mercy is not given to euphemisms, nor is it satisfied with conventional wisdom. During his campaign for president last year, one of his catchphrases was “¡Viva la libertad, carajo!” Translation: “Long live freedom, dammit!”

Restoring freedom to Cuba will never be a UN priority. But even if it were, abolishing the US embargo is not the way to achieve it. Recent history has made this clear.

When President Barack Obama announced in 2014 that he would normalize relations with the regime in Havana, he argued that rapprochement would support “America’s commitment to freedom and democracy” and would result in “making the lives of ordinary Cubans a little easier, freer, more prosperous.” More engagement was the best way to advance freedom and human rights for the people of Cuba, Obama said. “This is what change looks like.”

It wasn’t.

Following Obama’s move, Havana’s harassment of dissidents intensified. It was a repression of churches and religious groups. Human rights activists and protesters were soon arrested at a faster rate than ever before. Lifting restrictions on US trade with Cuba, in other words, made life worse for ordinary Cubans. Why? Because, among other reasons, the Cuban government owns or controls almost all major businesses in the country. Authorizing more business with Cuba meant putting more wealth into the regime’s coffers. By making the dictatorship richer, Obama only strengthened it.

For decades, politicians, journalistsand think tanks they made claims that the US embargo was responsible for Cuba’s misery, and that if only it were repealed, the island would experience such a surge of tourism, consumer goods and democratic influence that the Communist strongholds of Havana would crumble.

But if trade could have overthrown the regime, it would have already done so. The US embargo, after all, not prevents the export of hundreds of millions of dollars worth of goods in Cuba every year. Indeed, the United States in recent years has been one of Cuba’s largest sources of imports. And in any case, Cuba has always been free to trade with the rest of the world.

What the embargo prevents is not American business with Cuba, but American business with Cuba credit. American producers can export agricultural goods to Cuba as long as they are paid in cash. But they are barred from federal credit guarantees and other types of corporate welfare. The embargo is not rooted in revenge. It was a response to the fact that, after imposing communism on the island, Fidel Castro nationalized—that is, stole—American refineries, sugar mills, power generators, banks and other property worth billions of dollars.

I previously mentioned my 2002 visit to Oswaldo Payathe courageous founder of the Christian Liberation Movement of Cuba and, at the time, Cuba’s leading human rights dissident. When I asked him if the US embargo should be lifted, he replied: “Tiende tu mano a Cuba, pero primero pide que le desaten las manos a los cubanos.” Reach out to Cuba – but first untie the hands of the Cuban people.

It is shameful that the UN would side with the dictators in Havana rather than the nation that has done more for the freedom of the people of Cuba than any other. It is doubly shameful that those who voted in favor of the resolution also included former communist satraps from Eastern Europe that were freed when the US triumphed in the Cold War.

To his credit, Mile doesn’t care how many governments Argentina has to fight to defend freedom. “Our country categorically opposes the Cuban dictatorship and … condemns all regimes that perpetuate the violation of human rights and individual freedoms,” he said last week. His former foreign minister may not have gotten the message. Her successor will not make that mistake.

This column is excerpted from Arguable, Jeff Jacoby’s weekly email newsletter. To subscribe to Arguable, visit globe.com/arguable.

Jeff Jacoby can be reached at [email protected]. Follow X @jeff_jacoby.