Cuba and the geopolitics of submarine cables
kentik.com
kentik.com
Please inform yourself before spreading the dictatorship propaganda or you become a useful fool for its non elected government and support the misery of 11 million people.
https://www.heritage.org/trade/report/why-the-cuban-trade-em... https://cubitanow.com/
And I am not siding with a dictator, I am opposing what the USA does. Do you think what they are doing is the best way to achieve change? If they really wanted the government to be gone, they would long have joined the fate of Hussain.
Or, maybe, your HN comment.
Likewise, the US is all about sovereignty of nations that border an enemy (Russia, China). But get within the hemisphere of the US and not be US aligned? You get the Cuba / Venezuela treatment.
When I was on holiday in Cuba shortly before Castro's death, as with everything in the country, have seen that those with access to the government(public sector employees, military or students) have healthy access to the internet and the rest have ridiculously expensive and limited internet.
It's fascinating place really. The guy I rented a casa particular in Havana was in process of building his hostel empire on AirBnB from his office in a government building. His girlfriend was studying computer science and was well versed on the internet culture. In front of their house is Estadio Panamericano, and is a public place with ridiculously expensive ETECSA Wi-Fi which is the only way to connect to the internet if you are a tourist or not-privileged. People having video chat when crying and military dropping by occasionally to check if everything is alright. They also have some sort of network for sharing movies/music and gaming within the city.
I'm still confused on how to feel about Cuba.
Sure, You won't become a billionaire in Cuba, but you also don't have to worry about health care, homelessness, food insecurity, education, etc.
It completely destroys the argument that a Cuban cable is “a threat to national security”.
A recommended read, both for the rebuttal as the technical details.
They haven't changed due to the US embargo for decades. So what is the point?
This is another example of a small group of loud people that hold sway over a national policy.
When we support most dictators in the world, but embargo Cuba, it sounds less like a moral stance, and more like hypocrisy.
The actual, reason for the embargo, of course, is not a moral stance, or a hypocritical one. It is simply courting Cuban voters[1] in Florida.
In Canada, this kind of phenomenon is called 'America sneezes, we catch a cold.'
[1] Now that Florida's fully fallen off the spectrum of reasonable politics, those voters may well become less relevant for both parties.
Where was the US embargo when Saudi dictatorship murdered and dismembered a journalist on foreign soil?
Sounds like you k ow nothing of history, US currently supports about 20 dictators around the world.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Jamal_Khash...
The reason we still have an embargo on Cuba is because pro-embargo Cuban-American refugees are a huge minority of a swing state, and sending a child away from his abusive father to Cuba literally cost the Democrats the 2000 election (incidentally leading to at least 2 of those 3 invasions). Arguably, a stupid technicality like that is worse than if it was a Masada-type situation, but what can you do
Precedent, I assume. If you start an embargo or other sanctions, and then drop it when the entity shows that they're not going to back down, you're sending a signal to others: show that you're not going to back down and we'll drop the sanctions because what's the point? And that will dull the blade of the threat.
It's similar to negotiating with hostage takers and terrorists. Once you do it, you encourage everyone to take hostages in order to "negotiate" whatever they want done.
Israel: https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-only-country-at-un-to-j...
> On top of that more internet cables will not improve access for the cuban people, will only empower that dictatorship to do more evil.
> The dictators know internet is its doom and they do all they can to restrict the access to its own people and cut it completely.
Where is the proof for these preposterous claims that North Korea and Russia are in bed together?
They wanted to create an alternate society, and saw capitalist trade as corrupting.
It’s ironic Cuban leaders are whining about things aren’t working well because capitalists won’t trade with them.
Edit: Che even cited America’s early protectionist trade policy as something to emulate.
If the US has an embargo against Cuba because it is a communist country. Why does the US trade with China, and up until recently Russia?
I gave the whole Nixon tried another approach with China (which also didn't work), but it fell flat as many things show that the US is still very actively pursuing this embargo hurting the Cuban people.
The US's foreign policy (like most foreign policies) is defined by expediency, and doing business with China is definitely more expedient both in the abstract and in a historical context than business with Cuba.
(Besides, the US didn't do very much business with Russia when it was communist. Business picked up after Russia ceased to be communist, under a doctrine of rapid economic liberalization that the US encouraged and helped enact.)
- We have a ton of Cuban exiles (very opposed to the regime) who are in a very geographically important location in Florida voting-wise
- The cost of an embargo against Cuba is minimal since Cuba doesn't have that much industry of interest
You can find a copy here:
https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/163960/The%20Geopolitics%20of%...
Based on this analysis, it turns out that New Orleans is the most strategically located city in North America because it controls the mouth of the Mississippi River. This has been recognized for a long time which is why Thomas Jefferson did the Louisiana Purchase, the British attacked New Orleans at the end of the War of 1812 and why the US wanted Texas so much (to defend New Orleans.
It turns out if you look at a map that the island of Cuba can potentially controls the path of any shipments leaving New Orleans and headed to the rest of the world.
Thus the US either needs to have a friendly regime in Cuba or if unfriendly, one that is weak enough not to be a threat.
There is no such calculus with China and Russia. A strong China or Russia is not a direct threat to the US homeland.
So the embargo is more about great power realpolitik and geopolitics more so than about communism.
I vaguely remember the USA saying something last year about Russia not having any rights to impose its interest on the sovereign Ukraine...
If you were correct, things would be even worse - congratulation USA for consciously having the blood of all Ukrainian and Russian soldiers and civilians on your hands.
Yes your description of the situation in Eastern Europe is accurate, although I would remove the emotive language and note that there are multiple parties responsible besides USG, and USG’s purposes are more aligned with the welfare of Ukrainian citizens excluding Russian ethnic minorities than the administrators of the Russian federation.
Which is, at a fundamental level, correct - every law can be broken but the laws of physics. But nobody forces you to use your power to achieve immoral goals, so while you need power, you are still free to decide how to use it.
That’s not to say USG is morally in the wrong, all successful states operate along this principle.
That is wrong, success does not imply morality.
But we started at hypocrisy and if your premise is might make right but you deny other countries this premise, then you are hypocritical. North Korea building nuclear weapons is just them following this premise, so instead of saying North Korea is bad, they should say we understand, they just want some of this might makes right, too. You could still oppose them, because it is in conflict with your might, but then you would at least no longer be hypocritical. And I fully understand why they don't do it, they have a much better image if they maintain the we are good, they are bad narrative, but this exactly what makes them hypocritical, hypocritical in what they do and say, not necessarily in what they actually belief.
As long as the profit kerps flowing, i see no issue here. /s
Ending the embargo would let the American wheels of commerce grind the Cuban communists into the ground. New rich people can buy the old sugar mills and build resorts and setup medical tourism businesses.
Giving the descendants of Cuban emigres back old sugar farms or whatever is one of the more insane policy provisions possible. Cuban power in Florida will wane as the state political balance continues its shift right and maybe we’ll do something intelligent.
Especially compared to a isolated state like North Korea.
After you embargoed them, who are they suppose to make deals with, tooth fairy?
> confiscated U.S citizen business in Cuba in the 60's WITHOUT COMPENSATION
"On July 26, 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt seizes all Japanese assets in the United States in retaliation for the Japanese occupation of French Indo-China. "
I am glad we finally got to the root of the issue - all about money.