Cuba and US to normalize relations

[onejayhawk]

As many others have already said, about time.

Seems to me sabotage, if any, is more likely to come from another C-word (one that might end in -ongress)

About 20 years ago there was a movement to normalize relations during the Clinton Administration. The Cubans shot down a civilian aircraft on a humanitarian mission (google Hermanos al Rescate). Part of the fallout was that the normalization was shelved for a nother couple of decades. Given the timing, I conclude that Castro did not want to increase interaction with USA. Castro II may feel differently.

All that said, I predict that Cuba will be the 51st US state.

J

 

[Phrossack]

About 20 years ago there was a movement to normalize relations during the Clinton Administration. The Cubans shot down a civilian aircraft on a humanitarian mission (google Hermanos al Rescate). Part of the fallout was that the normalization was shelved for a nother couple of decades. Given the timing, I conclude that Castro did not want to increase interaction with USA. Castro II may feel differently.

All that said, I predict that Cuba will be the 51st US state.

J

Cubans don't want it. The Americans don't want it. Puerto Rico, on the other hand, had a vote in 2012 on statehood, though I haven't heard how that turned out.

 

[onejayhawk]

Cubans don't want it. The Americans don't want it. Puerto Rico, on the other hand, had a vote in 2012 on statehood, though I haven't heard how that turned out.

PR is a protectorate. There are advantages to NOT being a state, which they would give up. Cuba will not have that issue, most likely.

Determining whether Americans or Cubans want Cuba to join the US would be an interesting experiment. I deny that anyone could answer that question today. Too many variables.

J

 

[plarq]

I think the biggest impact for the US will be greater availability of Cuban cigars and a new destination for those horrendous Caribbean cruises that Americans love so much. Economically speaking Cuba is too small and poor to be relevant.

For Cuba the impact will of course be bigger, but it will only be huge if Raul continues with the liberalization, that is, with the transition to capitalism. Which he probably will. So the question is if Cuba will become a China, a capitalist dictatorship, or if Cubans will finally bring down the regime now that they have access to more information and have more freedom to move. We'll see soon enough.

Cuba is too small to take Chinese route.

BTW, if it was not the Sino-Soviet split, China would never gain trust of US in the 70s. Hence no Chinese route anyway, if you can't prove yourself a useful commie turncoat. So what would Cuba turncoat to? Nowhere. I'm quite surprise on Cuban position in this problem. It is the DPRK-style closed border that keeps DPRK afloat.

 

[Evie]

on a humanitarian mission (google Hermanos al Rescate)

From what I googled up, it doesn't seem like anything I would call humanitarian.

It seems that while the group had originally been formed to help rafters, by the founders' own admission (under oath, in court), by the time of the flight their mission had turned political, and among other things they were violating Cuban airspace (again his own admission) to drop political leaflets on Havana (again own admission). This despite a warning from the FAA (per testimony of the FAA official who gave the warning, in court) to stop violating Cuban airspace already because it might get them shot down.

Said founder being (again his own admission, under oath, in court) a former CIA operative. Involved in the bay of Pigs invasion. Also one who directly shelled a Cuban hotel with a 20mm cannon at a separate point in the sixties. Also also someone who (on his own time - at least by his claim) f000lew supplies for the contras in the eighties.

You know, I can think of plenty of reasons for Castro to want those planes shot down that DON'T involve wanting to sabotage the peace process. Something like "Let's see, a known agent of a foreign power who is assisting anti-communist groups the world over and has participated in both an invasion and acts of terrorism on Cuban soil has flown a plane to drop leaflets over my country that tell my people my government is a bad government...what do I do about this?"

None of which make the shooting right (especially as they didn't wait for the planes to violate cuban airspace to shoot THAT time). But it doesn't theories about wanting to derail a normalization process.

 

[plarq]

From what I googled up, it doesn't seem like anything I would call humanitarian.

It seems that while the group had originally been formed to help rafters, by the founders' own admission (under oath, in court), by the time of the flight their mission had turned political, and among other things they were violating Cuban airspace (again his own admission) to drop political leaflets on Havana (again own admission). This despite a warning from the FAA (per testimony of the FAA official who gave the warning, in court) to stop violating Cuban airspace already because it might get them shot down.

Said founder being (again his own admission, under oath, in court) a former CIA operative. Involved in the bay of Pigs invasion. Also one who directly shelled a Cuban hotel with a 20mm cannon at a separate point in the sixties. Also also someone who (on his own time - at least by his claim) f000lew supplies for the contras in the eighties.

You know, I can think of plenty of reasons for Castro to want those planes shot down that DON'T involve wanting to sabotage the peace process. Something like "Let's see, a known agent of a foreign power who is assisting anti-communist groups the world over and has participated in both an invasion and acts of terrorism on Cuban soil has flown a plane to drop leaflets over my country that tell my people my government is a bad government...what do I do about this?"

None of which make the shooting right (especially as they didn't wait for the planes to violate cuban airspace to shoot THAT time). But it doesn't theories about wanting to derail a normalization process.

Interesting. However, in a bilateral relation, the weaker side is rarely the one who can act at his own will without consequences. US can violate peace talks without consequences (maybe lose a bit diplomatic credit), but Saddam or other players may have risk their lives playing as US did.

 

[onejayhawk]

The founder was a CIA asset, not operative. That's a big difference. He was an anti-Castro activist of long standing.

The plane was, at least in part, looking for boaters to rescue--hence humanitarian. To be sure, Castro had good reason to dislike the organization. They openly defied and dissented against the government. The flight was one of many over an extended period of time. Did this one do something extra to irritate the regime? Unknown. Again, the timing is suspicious.

J

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Whatever the case, Cuba got exactly what it wanted from the US in this deal, and the US looks like a cornered rat. Obama's speech revealed that the US -- one of only 2 nations on earth that actively voted against a UN Resolution to lift the blockade -- can no longer blunder around the world bombing and strangling whoever they want.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight that matters, but the size of the fight in the dog.

And all of the Cuban Five are home. So, win-win.

¡Venceremos!
¡Patria o muerte!

 

[onejayhawk]

Whatever the case, Cuba got exactly what it wanted from the US in this deal, and the US looks like a cornered rat. Obama's speech revealed that the US -- one of only 2 nations on earth that actively voted against a UN Resolution to lift the blockade -- can no longer blunder around the world bombing and strangling whoever they want.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight that matters, but the size of the fight in the dog.

And all of the Cuban Five are home. So, win-win.

¡Venceremos!
¡Patria o muerte!

You underestimate this administrations ability to blunder. Look who has been the Seacetaries of State.

It does look like a huge overpayment just to claim another "win".

J

 

[ReindeerThistle]

Cuba's take on it:


Link to video.

 

[Mechanicalsalvation]

He has overseas accounts as a safety measure in case he got ousted. He would use them to buy a comfortable exile at some other dictatorship. All despots do that.

But you're right that as a measure of a dictator's actual wealth account figures are irrelevant. He doesn't have to pay for his stuff with his own money, as Cuba's Treasury can be used as his personal wallet.

Castro seem to turn out as rather one of a kind, dont you think? I bet he have had enough and overseas accounts wouldnt mean much to him but regarded the bureaucratic corruption I dont have much illusions...

 

[kramerfan86]

Seems pretty clear congress is going to bugger up any attempt to properly and fully alter relations by keeping the stupid embargo in place but something is better than nothing.

 

[GenMarshall]

So, what was the point on keeping the embargo up and going since the fall of the Soviet Union?

 

[ReindeerThistle]

So, what was the point on keeping the embargo up and going since the fall of the Soviet Union?

To appease a small, yet vocal (and violent) gusano population in S. Florida and N. Jersey.

Plus, it is a battle of ideas, and the PTB in the US don't want the Cuban example to take hold in the US.

 

[Farm Boy]

Whatever the case, Cuba got exactly what it wanted from the US in this deal

And I just got another more open market for my environmentally superior genetically modified soybeans! Shiggity.

 

[luiz]

Cuba is a fetish, and nothing more. For the left and the right.

The left feigns indignation at the embargo, arguing that it hurts the common people and not the regime, or that it's hypocritical and blah blah blah. All true. But it ignores that the same left cries for embargoes all the time against regimes they don't like, such as Apartheid South Africa (did the embargo not hurt the common people there?), Pinochet's Chile (better human rights record than Cuba) or even Israel (complete joke).

The right OTOH insists on keeping this embargo but seems to have no problem trading with China or Vietnam, who are also ruled by a Communist Party dictatorship and unlike Cuba actually fought the US on bloody wars. And in many ways are more repressive regimes than Cuba ever was.

Cuba is irrelevant economically, so all that's left is an ideological fetish for the handful of communist mummies left in the world and those who think that antagonizing those mummies is more important than improving the conditions of the Cuban people. The left is correct that the embargo is a joke and must go, but their moral outrage and feigned indignation are pretty annoying to say the least.

 

[warpus]

That's neat how you're able to divide people into "left" and "right" camps and assign thoughts to each camp. Must make your worldview a lot easier to manage.

 

[luiz]

That's neat how you're able to divide people into "left" and "right" camps and assign thoughts to each camp. Must make your worldview a lot easier to manage.

It really does.

 

[warpus]

Aren't you afraid that your conclusions aren't really going to be very useful?

 

[luiz]

Aren't you afraid that your conclusions aren't really going to be very useful?

No, they're useful in context.

I obviously meant "left crying about the embargo" and "right who want to keep the embargo". I mean, I consider myself a right-winger and I want the embargo gone, so obviously I didn't mean to imply that all right-winger support the embargo, nor that all left-wingers whine about it. I'm speaking of two subgroups, and pointing to how silly they are.