The changing back & forth rhetoric between the US and Cuba has been interesting so far in the Obama era. Not long ago, it sounded as if the Barack-Raul lovefest might indeed spawn normalized relations-- some 'analysts' were even anticipating a deal of sorts at the recent Summit of the Americas. The resumption of some travel/remittances to Cuba seemed to generate some serious momentum.
Hell, I thought Obama might very well be able to get some concessions out of Cuba in exchange for ending the embargo (this is my preferred scenario, btw.)
Well since the summit, it seems that Fidel has reeled in his little brother a bit, first "clarifying" Raul's statement that expressed willingness to put human rights on the table for potential US-Cuba talks, and now by accusing the US of wanting to "enslave" Cuba.
I know this idiotic bullshit is typical for his May Day speeches/statements, but Fidel seems to be upping the rhetoric to prevent any improvement in US-Cuba relations.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090501/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/cb_cuba;_ylt=AnEDqBeiOtbLAj1fk5CctJm3IxIF
Thoughts? What will/should Obama do? Should the US demand concessions of some sort from Cuba? Would Obama be willing to expend political capital to cancel the embargo without preconditions?
I think the CIA should arm the Cubans in America with vintage World War 2 weapons and allow them to try and take back the island.
The Cuban in Florida hate Castro, to win the Presindency you need Florida.
just drop the embargo and let the Floridians buy the island. problem solved.
Quote from: derspiess on May 01, 2009, 11:16:27 AM
...
Thoughts? What will/should Obama do? Should the US demand concessions of some sort from Cuba? Would Obama be willing to expend political capital to cancel the embargo without preconditions?
Remember, the US under Obama are trying to improve their image on the world stage. In that light, the they should not make 'demands' of anyone. Besides if a 50 year embargo hasn't cowed Cuba, maintaining it for another 50 won't make a difference. So how exactly would asking for concessions work ? A third war perhaps ? And what would such concessions be anyway ?
G.
Indeed, grallon is right.
Obama should go ask raul what the US can do in return for the US for dropping the embargo. We should make some concessions to Cuba, and maybe then they will allow us to reset the relationship.
I think Obama should lift the embargo regardless. If he manages to get something out of Cuba, good. If not, then the embargo is still stupid, and should go. History shows that open relations with free market democracies are the biggest danger to communist regimes, so we can put a dent in Cuba's communism that way even without getting any concessions.
Wait for Fidel Castro to die, then lift the embargo. I don't think any improvement in relations is possible as long as he lives.
Quote from: PDH on May 01, 2009, 11:17:59 AM
I think the CIA should arm the Cubans in America with vintage World War 2 weapons and allow them to try and take back the island.
This sounds like the best plan.
Hmm... I wonder if it's been tried before....
What's the point of the embargo again?
It's purpose is to prop up the Communist regime in Cuba by giving them a believable external threat.
I think US should take a hardline approach towards Cuba until all those guilty of human rights abuse and torture in the Cuban military base of Guantanamo are brought to justice.
Quote from: Martinus on May 01, 2009, 11:47:12 AM
I think US should take a hardline approach towards Cuba until all those guilty of human rights abuse and torture in the Cuban military base of Guantanamo are brought to justice.
Done.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on May 01, 2009, 11:46:27 AM
It's purpose is to prop up the Communist regime in Cuba by giving them a believable external threat.
Meh, I am no fan of the embargo, but the idea that it is what is keeping the Castros in charge is a bit of a stretch.
Quote from: PDH on May 01, 2009, 11:17:59 AM
I think the CIA should arm the Cubans in America with vintage World War 2 weapons and allow them to try and take back the island.
But this time we should shoot any that try to get back.
Quote from: PDH on May 01, 2009, 11:17:59 AM
I think the CIA should arm the Cubans in America with vintage World War 2 weapons and allow them to try and take back the island.
You are insane. Korean War era weaponry should be far more effective and nearly as cheap.
Quote from: derspiess on May 01, 2009, 11:16:27 AMThoughts? What will/should Obama do? Should the US demand concessions of some sort from Cuba? Would Obama be willing to expend political capital to cancel the embargo without preconditions?
I think this is to some extent Obama's strategy with rogue states. If the US is the friendly country that's willing to talk it makes their anti-American rhetoric difficult to sustain, lessens antipathy in other (in this case Latin American) countries and makes it seem like the Cubans/Venezualans/Iranians are the ones unwilling to make an honest deal, which is usually the case.
I watched an interview with James Baker and he said that Reagan through to Clinton offered the Iranians unconditional talks at Secretary of State level on all subjects. It never happened because the Iranian regime could never generate enough support to meet with the US at that level. The one time they tried, with Clinton, Khatami authorised the meeting (at the UN) and, at the last minute, unknown to the US delegation Khameini needed to speak with the Foreign Minister. So even then it failed. But I think it recasts how it appears and puts the onus on the other regimes to make a very minimal concession, to be willing to negotiate in good faith.
On Cuba in particular I think it's just bizarre that it's a topic for discussion really. This is a tiny, impoverished Caribbean island. Lift the embargo, don't. I don't think it matters hugely to the US (though it would be enormous to the Cuban economy).
I think the changes made so far which I believe are to do with Cuban Americans visitng Cuba seem to me to be pretty common sense. I think it should be lifted in general terms because I don't think Cuba's regime is that egregious. But I don't think Cuba should occupy more than five minutes worth of thought or action. It's unimportant. Same goes for Chavez actually. I think the American over-reaction (in my opinion) to Castro in the 60s and Chavez recently has actually bolstered their position. It makes them seem far, far more important than they are.
Quote from: Grallon on May 01, 2009, 11:30:09 AM
And what would such concessions be anyway ?
Concessions could range anywhere from compensation to US/Cuban citizens who had their property expropriated by the communist regime (the Cuban one, that is ;) ) to concrete human rights improvements by the Cuban gov't. to vague promises from Cuba to do something sometime in the future in the general direction of improving human rights.
And btw, I know some of you think Cubans probably have all the human rights they need (in the form of free health care and education), but some of us odd sorts view freedom of speech, association, etc. to be fundamental human rights.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 01, 2009, 12:13:54 PM
I think the changes made so far which I believe are to do with Cuban Americans visitng Cuba seem to me to be pretty common sense. I think it should be lifted in general terms because I don't think Cuba's regime is that egregious. But I don't think Cuba should occupy more than five minutes worth of thought or action. It's unimportant. Same goes for Chavez actually. I think the American over-reaction (in my opinion) to Castro in the 60s and Chavez recently has actually bolstered their position. It makes them seem far, far more important than they are.
I disagree that we've overreacted to Chavez, but putting that aside, don't you think an improvement in US-Cuban relations would result in a general improvement in US relations with Latin America?
Quote from: derspiess on May 01, 2009, 12:18:05 PM
Concessions could range anywhere from compensation to US/Cuban citizens who had their property expropriated by the communist regime (the Cuban one, that is ;) )
To be honest I don't think that'll ever happen.
Quote from: derspiess on May 01, 2009, 12:20:42 PMI disagree that we've overreacted to Chavez, but putting that aside, don't you think an improvement in US-Cuban relations would result in a general improvement in US relations with Latin America?
I think it would, but I think a lot of recent hostility was anti-Bush feeling. If I were deciding I would treat Castro and Chavez as irrelevances, guys who just don't matter and fete Bachmann (sp?) and Lula. Avoid the Kirchners.
Though I do think getting rid of the embargo would be an objectively good thing.
Got to run to dinner, I'll post more later :blush:
Quote from: garbon on May 01, 2009, 11:44:30 AM
What's the point of the embargo again?
To punish Cuba for expropriating US-owned property.
Quote from: derspiess on May 01, 2009, 12:18:05 PM
Quote from: Grallon on May 01, 2009, 11:30:09 AM
And what would such concessions be anyway ?
Concessions could range anywhere from compensation to US/Cuban citizens who had their property expropriated by the communist regime (the Cuban one, that is ;) ) to concrete human rights improvements by the Cuban gov't. to vague promises from Cuba to do something sometime in the future in the general direction of improving human rights.
And btw, I know some of you think Cubans probably have all the human rights they need (in the form of free health care and education), but some of us odd sorts view freedom of speech, association, etc. to be fundamental human rights.
They don't, those that did left or died a long time ago. All they really want is to be able to buy TVs & Playstations.
As an aside, I recently heard that the Cuban government takes 33% off the top of any remittances. The source was a Miami Cuban so take the information with as many grains of salt as you think appropriate.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 01, 2009, 03:01:30 PM
As an aside, I recently heard that the Cuban government takes 33% off the top of any remittances. The source was a Miami Cuban so take the information with as many grains of salt as you think appropriate.
That's likely. I don't know the rates but most developing countries tax remittances as income. It's the primary source of inward investment in many.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 01, 2009, 03:01:30 PM
As an aside, I recently heard that the Cuban government takes 33% off the top of any remittances. The source was a Miami Cuban so take the information with as many grains of salt as you think appropriate.
They are a Communist country - frankly I am surprised it is as low as 33%.
Shouldn't they take it all, and divide it up evenly amongst The People?
here's a pretty good timeline of how things could work out regarding normalisation:
http://vietnam.usembassy.gov/chronology.html
(just substitute property for MIA's)
Quote from: Grey Fox on May 01, 2009, 11:21:27 AM
The Cuban in Florida hate Castro, to win the Presindency you need Florida.
This has changed in the last few years. The children of the the refugees from the 50s and 60s and the refugees of the 80s and later have different attitudes to the refugees from the 50s and 60s.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE53K5CS20090421
QuoteForty-three percent said they favored ending the embargo while 42 percent said they thought it should continue and 15 percent said they had no answer or were unable to respond when asked their opinion about the sanctions.
Quote from: Berkut on May 01, 2009, 11:33:34 AM
Indeed, grallon is right.
Obama should go ask raul what the US can do in return for the US for dropping the embargo. We should make some concessions to Cuba, and maybe then they will allow us to reset the relationship.
:lol:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 01, 2009, 01:07:34 PM
Quote from: garbon on May 01, 2009, 11:44:30 AM
What's the point of the embargo again?
To punish Cuba for expropriating US-owned property.
Meyer Lansky is dead Yi.
Quote from: saskganesh on May 01, 2009, 03:16:46 PM
here's a pretty good timeline of how things could work out regarding normalisation:
http://vietnam.usembassy.gov/chronology.html
(just substitute property for MIA's)
You think that Cuba will give the US a 90% ownership in its' number one crop?
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 01, 2009, 03:06:47 PM
That's likely. I don't know the rates but most developing countries tax remittances as income. It's the primary source of inward investment in many.
Are you suggesting this is the standard income tax at work and not a special remittance tax?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on May 02, 2009, 01:45:34 AMAre you suggesting this is the standard income tax at work and not a special remittance tax?
It could be. I didn't understand why you brought up that Cuba taxes remittances at all. Almost all developing countries tax remittances because they're a major source of income.
I think the UK has a taxes remittances too actually.
Quote from: derspiess on May 01, 2009, 12:18:05 PM
And btw, I know some of you think Cubans probably have all the human rights they need (in the form of free health care and education), but some of us odd sorts view freedom of speech, association, etc. to be fundamental human rights.
I agree that we should not be Cuba's best buds but I fail to see how being unpleasant is a good enough reason to keep the embargo going. We put the embargo on Cuba because they allied with the Soviets not because they were oppressive...if that was the reason we would probably have stopped trading with most of Latin America at some point.
Quote from: Sheilbh on May 01, 2009, 12:20:52 PM
To be honest I don't think that'll ever happen.
Neither do I. I was just setting up the range of what could be considered a concession.