The beginning of the end for Fidel?

[HershOstropoler]

Ned:

"However, they owe their prior owners just compensation."

Well that depends on how they acquired their property. I don't know the details of how US companies got their property in Cuba - anyone know?

"Expropriation of property without compensation is a violation of international law"

Without just compensation, it is. So is invading another country unless you act in self defense against an immanent threat. Just for example.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Jack, no one doubts that governments have a right to expropriate property for social or other purposes. However, they owe their prior owners just compensation

The US corporations refused the compensation offered them, 20-year bonds. As in Guatemala five years earlier, the problem stemmed from the vale of the property the companies reported to the government for taxation pruposes. Since Company X said it was worth 5 million dollars for taxation purposes, the government offered them five million dollars worth of twenty-year bonds (which would grow in value with interest, do know the rate Cuba offered). Problem for the companies was, they had been cheating the previous Cuban government by lowballing the value of their companies, so that company that claimed to be worth five million was actually worth twenty million. Honestly, I'm sorry but they ****ed themselves.

The another group of Americans with claims on Cuban proerty were American gangsters. I hope I'm not alone in thinking those claims don't need to be recognized. Just because property was legally purchased, if it was done with illegal proceeds, I don't think you have a legitimate claim.

The final group of Americans who have property claims in Cuba are former the former rulers of Cuba and their henchmen who have become U.S. citizens. Since the seizure of property predates their becoming American citizens, should we really have say in the matter? If the government takes my property, I move to Canada and become a citizan, should Canada intervene with the US on my behalf? No.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


The US corporations refused the compensation offered them, 20-year bonds. As in Guatemala five years earlier, the problem stemmed from the vale of the property the companies reported to the government for taxation pruposes. Since Company X said it was worth 5 million dollars for taxation purposes, the government offered them five million dollars worth of twenty-year bonds (which would grow in value with interest, do know the rate Cuba offered). Problem for the companies was, they had been cheating the previous Cuban government by lowballing the value of their companies, so that company that claimed to be worth five million was actually worth twenty million. Honestly, I'm sorry but they ****ed themselves.

The another group of Americans with claims on Cuban proerty were American gangsters. I hope I'm not alone in thinking those claims don't need to be recognized. Just because property was legally purchased, if it was done with illegal proceeds, I don't think you have a legitimate claim.

The final group of Americans who have property claims in Cuba are former the former rulers of Cuba and their henchmen who have become U.S. citizens. Since the seizure of property predates their becoming American citizens, should we really have say in the matter? If the government takes my property, I move to Canada and become a citizan, should Canada intervene with the US on my behalf? No.

On the money che! (Never thought I would say that.)

The vast amount of illegal money that was funnelled into Cuba and protected by the Batista regime is, IMO, one of the causes of the revolution. It is sad to say, but the Cuban people were being exploited. One of the very very few benefits of a totalitarian regime is its ability to end these types of arrangements. That being said, Cuba has ****ed itself in many ways by not trying to do things that will lead to an end of the embargo.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by HershOstropoler
Ned:

"However, they owe their prior owners just compensation."

Well that depends on how they acquired their property. I don't know the details of how US companies got their property in Cuba - anyone know?

By and large they purchased it legally. In the case of the US mob, they bought it legally in Cuba, but used the proceeds of illegal activities in the US to do so. No doubt, in some cases, during the periods of direct US administration and the subsequent period when Cuba was ostensibly free but the actual ruler of Cuba was the US ambassador, no doubt U.S. companies and persons were given unfair advantages in aquiring property in Cuba.

Ned, to really understand U.S.-Cuban relations, you have to go back to the 1st part of the 20th Century. It's true that since the begining of the U.S., we've coveted that island. Jefferson said the island should naturally belong to the U.S. During the 1890s, the Cuban people revolted a final time, and were winning the war. Cuba would eithe have achieved autonomy (like Puerto Rico) or full independence.

Americans generally supported the Cuban cause, as Americans themselves are instinctive anti-imperialists (at least as far as other empires are concerned). We sent a battleship to Cuba to let Spain know we were prepared to protect American lives and property in Cuba, and then the damned thing blew up.

Those who wanted to add Cuba to the U.S. seized upon the sinking of the Maine as a pretext to annex Cuba before it gained independence (it's better to take a colony from someone else than steal an independent country). We all know how the war went, but during the war, Congress passed a law that forbade the U.S. from annexing Cuba.

Instead we took over the island as a protectorate, it was ostensibly an indendent country, but we were "preparing" it for independence. That lasted until 1904. While Cuba was writing it's Constitution, we presented them with the Platt Amendment. We told them it had to be added to their Constitution or who knew how long it was take the Americans to leave. Reluctantly, Cuba accepted the amendment.

The Platt Amendment gave the U.S. a permanent lease at Guantanimo Bay. Only we have the right to cancel it. It also gave the U.S. the right to intervene in Cuba for any reason. It basically just legalized in Cuba the same sort of activity the US was continually engaged in around the Caribbean. And the US used it several times to invade and "restore order" or toss out a government it didn't like. It has always been hated by the Cuban people, and they have a new Constitution now, with no Platt Amendment (but they obviously can't throw the U.S. out of Guantanimo if it doesn't want to leave).

The whole history of Cuban-American relstions in the 20th Century basically necessitates that any Cuban government is going to be at best cool towards the US and at worst openly hostile. Anyone who wants any chance at being taken seriously in Cuba politically is going to have to be anti-US, even in a post-Communist Cuba.

Given our history, is it any wonder why the Cuba people prefer Castro to anything we propose? He may be a bastard, but he's their bastard.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO


Touche.

Here it is then. Cuba has recovered well from the fall of the USSR. They have been quietly garnering allies and friends in central and south america. Their present form of government is entrenched and will likely survive Castro. IMO, economic pressure will increase on them to formulate change only when the embargo is lifted. The US will do this, but only after Castro's demise. It will happen in stages that will appear to benefit the expatriates in order not to lose their support. Eventually the government in Cuba will eithier reform or become economically dependent on the US. Should the later happen, then the chances of a Batista like regime coming to power increase.

The impact of dissidents is hard to gauge in a post-Castro cuba because the strategic alliances that will bring them power will most likely have ties with some in the current government. This is impossible to tell at this juncture due to the closed nature of the current government.

Returning the favor, I have to agree with everything here Plato has said.

I think that once the embargo is ended, it will be much harder for Cuba to maintain it's current economic system, with litterally tens fo billions of dollars of American money chaffing at the bit to be invested in Cuba. Properly managed, the Cubans might be able to make some sort of arrangement with capitalism and still keep the best features of their socialist system, but I don't really think they can. Castro would be able to do it, and that's probably why we're waiting for him to die, so that he won't be able to lay the foundation for a hybrid system that can survive without him.

[Odin]

Good posts Che. The US cororations don't deserve compensation after the BS thier puppet Batista pulled.

Hasn't anyone noticed that the Miami Cubans are mostly conservatives. I am sick of thier anti-Castro BS.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Odin
Hasn't anyone noticed that the Miami Cubans are mostly conservatives. I am sick of thier anti-Castro BS.

I would temper that by saying most vocal Cuban-Americans are conservative or further right. There are many Cubans who do not agree with th leadership of the Cuban community here in the U.S., but it is not safe to say it out loud. It could easily result in you or your family members losing a job, getting physically harrased or assaulted, having your house or business burned down, or killed. When I say that there are terrorists openly walking the streets of Miami, I am not joking. If they're willing to committ acts of terror against Cuba, there and in other countries, why should they stop just because they are in the U.S.?

Heck, in Chicago a theater company tried to put on a play about Che Guevara. First their theater burned down. Then the Mexican resteraunt where they were going to move the play to started getting threats. The play was canceled. These people do not play around, and because the U.S. government wants their suport both politically and as a thorn in Castro's side, they don't do anything about it.

[Odin]

Now I really hate the cons in Little Havanna.

[chequita guevara]

One terrorist in particular is especially heinous. Felix Rodriguez is personally responsible for the downing of a Cuban airliner in Venezuela, killing 87 people. He claims to have the watch Che Guevara wore when captured (before his execution) as a trophy. He was temporarily imprisoned in Costa Rica, but the U.S. leaned very hard on them to let him go. This CIA-paid murderer now lives in South Florida.

[Ned]

Che, thanks for your posts. If Castro really offered to pay book value, I can see why this whole flap between the US and Cuba is a little misguided. Now, if Castro were to enter into serious negotiations on the compensation issue, I think he would force an end to the embargo.

As to the exiles, I think they fell into the Republican camp because of Kennedy and the Bay of Pigs. As to ruthlessness, do not forget that a leading theory on the Kennedy assassination is that Cuban exiles/Mob did it for revenge.

Che, you did not discuss the main point of this thread, Eloy Monoyo. What are his politics and do you think he has a chance to form an real political party in Cuba?

[chequita guevara]

I would say it depends on how he's seen by Cubans after living in South Florida for 19 years. If he's tainted by his assciationwith the gusanos, then I'd say forget it. As a fellow socalist, I wish him luck. Cuba could only become stronger by becomming a full democracy, rather than the limited one it is now.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, thanks for your posts. If Castro really offered to pay book value, I can see why this whole flap between the US and Cuba is a little misguided.

It's only misguided if you accept the United States' stated position for the embargo. The actual reason is that Cuba continues to serve as an example of what the U.S. will do to any country that tries to determine its own destiny.

You have to remember, Castro didn't take power immediately after overthrowing Batista, and the Cuba tried very hard to maintain good relations with the U.S., while improving things for the Cuban people.

If you interfere with US companies abilty to extract as much profit as they want, you will be treated harshly. Heck, Castro even advised the Sandanistas when they first ousted Somaza not to tick off the US or they would share his fate.

[yaroslav]

My two cents:

I believe that Castro will have no problem while alive. When he will dead, probably his brother (Raúl Castro) will take the leadership. I don't believe him to change anything, and probably will retain the power without many changes. However, when he will dead, probably Cuba will change.

Gee, I hear yesterday or the day after a man who was in charge only because he open a library in his home That's what Castro does in his country

[Ned]

Here's a FAQ from an anti-Embargo type. I see if I can find one from the other point of view as well.

But what I said about Castro trying to negotiate compensation in order to end the embargo has apparently already been tried - and recently. Funny, I don't recall any news stories about this.

"What about compensation for U.S. property that was confiscated by the Cuban government in 1960?

Cuba's government has always acknowledged its obligation to compensate U.S. property owners and has indicated its willingness to sit down and negotiate. It has long since worked out satisfactory compensation agreements with all other countries that had similar claims.

Back in 1960 the U.S. imposed the embargo because Cuba had nationalized all U.S. properties. In 1977 the U.S. insisted that the embargo would not be lifted until the compensation issue had been worked out.

Cuba has repeatedly stated its willingness to negotiate a just compensation once the embargo is lifted and normal relations established. But on November 30 2001 the U.S. government turned down a Cuban offer to negotiate compensation for properties confiscated by the Revolution 40 years ago.

The U.S. State Department often claims, falsely, that Cuba has refused to pay such compensation. This is an outright lie, fed to the American people in order to gain support for the terrorist nature of the David/Goliath relationship between the two countries.

Through the years of the embargo and the Cold War against Cuba, the typical strategy of the State Department has been to pretend that it truly wants to negotiate compensation. In fact, there's no indication that the U.S. wants to bring this chapter to close, choosing instead to continue choking the Cuban people. "

http://www.historyofcuba.com/faqcuba/cfaq5.htm

[Ned]

Here is a portion of a story from today's NyTimes. Does anyone have anything more on this?

A Bush Faults White House On the Return Of 12 Cubans

By ABBY GOODNOUGH (NYT) 769 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 9 , Column 6

DISPLAYING FIRST 50 OF 769 WORDS - Gov. Jeb Bush this week criticized a White House decision to return 12 Cubans suspected of hijacking a boat in ... The governor's criticism of his brother's administration, in an interview with The Miami Herald on Thursday, came at a time of mounting tensions between the Republican Party and Cuban...