Steve Clemons has more than you probably want to read on the subject of different presidential candidates' positions on US-Cuba relations. The main point, though, is that Chris Dodd has boldly challenged the status quo, Barack Obama has put forward more modest proposals for change, and Hillary Clinton and the Republicans all support the status quo policies that have been failing for decades.
« Why Copyright? | Main | Labor Day Labor Bloging »
The Candidates and Cuba
03 Sep 2007 05:03 pm
Comments (10)
Sorry, slightly off-topic, but couldn't find a more suitable thread, and I think it is too important not to bring to your attention:
How the West summoned up a nuclear nightmare in Pakistan
Adrian Levy and Catherine Scott-Clark reveal how misguided deals with Pakistan have created a terrifying threat of nuclear terrorism
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2368174.ece
Helms Burton must be superseded by new law. As it now stands the US Government says that the land titles and deeds from the pre revolution are still valid. The essence of Helms Burton is the recognition of these old claims. A very very silly and destructive thing. I have no stats on what percentage of ownership exiles could claim but it is certainly huge.
Those exiles who might return at some point to reclaim their property are going to be real real popular with Cubans. Under any scenario where Castro's state fails and real reform starts to happen and if US law says American's own most of Cuba get ready for something so ugly that it will boggle the mind.
Very quietly as the USSR failed the US forgave all old debts and declared void all old pre revolution land titles. The same must be done with Cuba and the sooner the better Let these politicians come forward on this now. Not only will it put Cuban policy in play it will allow us to begin to formulate policies which could ease and guide the changes to come.
I loved Guy's comment above.
It's perhaps unfair to say Clinton represents the Republican wing of the Democratic Party; it is not unfair to say she follows the same "conventional-wisdom" on a myriad of issues; very disappointing. I certainly hope this train is derailed.
Hillary Clinton and the Republicans all support the status quo policies that have been failing for decades.Della Rovere is right. Hillary is so concerned with seeming strong, convincing people that it'll be OK to elect a woman president, that she's swallowed the DC conventional wisdom whole. Ironically, by doing so she weakens herself.
I don't see this train being derailed, though.
Rapier - Your claims of "huge anger" awaiting anyone who tries to negotiate for their stolen assets?
Well, that is just too bad for the angry ones.
Cuba has long since learned that the international system that everyone now buys into that encourages the flow of capital between borders, does not let a nation plunder the foreign investment it gets.
It might be best to start on talks before Castro dies, rather than expect to tromp in like arrogant idiots at the urging of nutso Exile extremists, thinking they can dictate terms once Castro is gone. Actually, that transition time is when the Revolutionaries will be at their most intransigent to show the People of Cuba they are not selling out the Revolution, which they will indicate is far deeper than a Cult of a particular Caudillo.
Many of the Cubans, as well as American property owners, had made legitimate investments that went back generations before Batista and are quite angry still. Not just that their investments and businesses were seized and doled out to "revolutionary MGMT", but who were the survivors of "no trial" firing squads that claimed relatives.
The US and USSR actually did their negotiating back in Nixon's days when trade arrangements were negotiated, regarding assets held by each side that had not been adjudicated.
Cuba has had to sit down with Mexico and Canada and so on when relations were normalized and deal with assets in escrow. It will have to deal with us, and the US will have to somehow eat or cancel out the 80 million some lawyers in robes felt were due families after their relatives violated Cuban airspace after warnings not to and were shot down...from Cuban assets.
The property claims are by far the most delusional aspect of U.S. policy towards Cuba, and the most morally indefensible.
Different Eastern European nations selected different solutions to the question of property claims after the Cold War ended. However, in all cases, these decisions were made by the nation itself, not by outsiders presuming to dictate a solution in their own self-interest.
One of the primary pillars of Castro's regime is the dread that "Mr. Jones" - the exiles - might come back. Whatever else the Cubans dislike about Castro, they hate and fear the exiles far worse. And the U.S. government has officially thrown itself behind the most intransigent and unrealistic exile claims. Helms-Burton essentially insists that the embargo will continue until the entire island is turned back over to rich corporations and the Mafia.
It would be impossible to choose a more counterproductive U.S. policy if we tried. Someone needs to put the exiles on the spot: if Cuba transitioned to a democratic government that respected civil liberties, but that government chose not to give the island back to the exiles, would they still be in favor of the embargo?
The greedy Batistists need to be smoked out and exposed for the fascists they are.
Shorter Hillary on every issue: same old same old, just done slightly less badly.
No thanks.
And as I said at Ezra's place, I'd like the first delegation to post-Fidel Cuba to be comprised of gay Miami Cubans, rather than people looking to fill container ships with '57 Chevys.
I just hope Castro does not die while Bush is in office. Like his Father, Bush probably would like a triumphalist visit to Havana, and the Neocons might be tempted into something rash.
the Republicans all support the status quo
I realize you probably don't follow *all* of the Republicans, but I have to point out that Ron Paul would end the embargo - you can find speeches from him going back to at least 2000 calling for an end to it.
Comments closed September 17, 2007.
| 
Heads in the Sand
How does this affect Israel?
Posted by Guy in Jersey | September 3, 2007 8:25 PM