When Cuba gets it before America

[BaiHu]

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/id...21227?irpc=932

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using Tapatalk 2

[MDS]

First, let me say that I self-identify as an American-born, bacon-loving, freedom-eating, gun-slinging, flag-waving, American-born American. It just so happens that my parents are all those things except the American-born part. They were born in Cuba, and only became American when their country was stolen from them, along with all their possessions, by a silver-tongued, power-hungry little clique of murderous bastards who played most of the Cuban people like a Casio keyboard against the then-current dictator Batista. It would not be entirely unfair to ascribe some small bias in my thinking about Cuba, and its history in the latter half of the 20th century.

In my maturing old age, I've taken a wait-and-see attitude about the changes in Cuba. For the last 10 years, the only real opinion I've had is that whatever changes do manage to happen in Cuba, they will mostly benefit the international community of fucking vultures that have been circling the island since the Soviet collapse, now one building a beach resort here, now another establishing a sugar cooperative there, each hoping to position themselves for maximum windfall-reaping capacity when the tide finally turns. In the meanwhile, I've had the pleasure of associating with these refugees that seems to have wielded a most outsized influence in US foreign policy, of being able to say about my father's people that "not even the mafia holds a grudge so tightly, with such relish, for so long." And so my relationship with my ancestors has been clean and simple and stable for a long time now.

But then Obama comes and screws that all up. I just don't know what to make about Cuba's apparent rapprochement with these here United States. A strong, irrational part of me deep down is transported to my childhood, where, in a diasporic game of tag, we took turns pretending to be Fidel and get chased, caught, and whipped by whatever American superheroes the other kids were pretending to be. That part of me hates Obama anyway, so it just adds another layer of depth to that feeling.

But another part of me, the part I like to think makes most of the important decisions, is more than a little confused. What's the end-game here? What's Obama got to win? What's he up to? There are lots of little possible reasons, what with our Great Game against Russia renewed, his party's political capital running low, and etc. But none of that is enough, it seems to me, to pay the big price. The only answer I can think is very personal, that maybe Obama hopes to leave office with "Fixed Cuba" on his resume. I can speculate to no end, but I can't seem to put my finger on a plausible answer. Maybe my bias is blinding me to something obvious.

But things are getting stupid. Not only has Obama done a 180 from his stance on Cuba - he used to insist that he'd love to renew relations but that it could only happen if Cuba allows free speech and etc - but also Raul's regime has been making demands in order to accept Obama's outstretched hand of help. The rational me says they'll relent, but they seem to have dug in their heels for the moment and in the absence of any clear logic behind Obama's decision here, I'm afraid to gamble on whether we'll capitulate!

Anyway, Obama's about to hang with Castro in Panama. Obama says he wants to test out this new diplomatic approach with Cuba. Here's a quote from Foreign Policy magazine - not exactly a bastion of Righteous Right-Wing Cuban Refugee Outrage.

But the idea of using Cuba as some sterile academic exercise is troubling, to say the least — a captive nation as some sort of guinea pig. What the president’s approach means is that U.S. policy will now subordinate the Castro regime’s harsh treatment of its own citizens — and its unabated campaigns to undermine U.S. interests around the globe — to an effort to “build trust” with an octogenarian regime that hasn’t change its behavior after 56 years in power. Change and hope, indeed.

That last sentence seems to be in line with Obama's approach to many things. Like he's favored by the gods or something, and can do no wrong, so just switch things up, cross your fingers, and stick to your talking points! In response to this kind of criticism, Obama said in an interview with the New York Times:

"It's a tiny little country. It's not one that threatens our core security interests, and so for us to test the proposition and if it turns out that it doesn't lead to better outcomes, we can adjust our policies."

Are you fucking kidding me? First of all, it's disingenuous at best to say that Cuba can't threaten our security interest. Anyone remember the single scariest moment of the Cold War? And as for size, Yemen's a pretty small country, too, and much too far away to believe it would threaten our security interests less than Cuba, so why don't we just give them anything they ask for and see if that makes things better? Or is it something about Cuba that makes it better suited as a Petri dish for Magical Foreign Policy experimentation?

Other than sticking to my guns about how the Cuban people won't benefit from any of this, (well, I'm sure a few elites and the military will,) I don't have any new insights about how things will go in Cuba. What's interesting about this is what it says about where the US is going as a country, as a hegemonic empire. I know of no historical exception to this pattern: when a powerful democracy falls to populism, it inevitably fails and is replaced by tyranny - first a left-wing demagogue which devolves naturally into good old right-wing tyranny.

Hate to resurrect and old thread, but all this seems like a follow-up to Raul's "liberal" policies mentioned in the OP. Which, I should say, are IMO totally symbolic and make a very small difference for a very few Cubans.

[Peally]

Great post. Personally I believe the only answer is "Resume says I fixed Cuba". I'm going to gag if he's remembered as anything other than a sack of garbage in history books.

[Edwin]

Are you fucking kidding me? First of all, it's disingenuous at best to say that Cuba can't threaten our security interest. Anyone remember the single scariest moment of the Cold War?

You're making the assumption that they have the same missiles they had back then. They don't.

[BaiHu]

I'm kind of glad that this was resurrected. Especially given this situation that I've neglected to post, but its relevance is high here:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102584028

The signing of a decree by President Vladimir Putin means that it can resume a self-imposed ban and offer S-300 anti-missile rocket systems to Iran for the first time since 2010.

Here are my points/thoughts/questions:

1) If Raul was engaging in 'politics' and trying to slash gov't spending and increase private sector growth, where was Maobama then? It would have been a great time to 'end these stupid sanctions', right? Show that Obama was pro business in the US and on the world stage.
2) Much like the 'Iran Deal' (see above), I share in MDS & Peally's thoughts which these are all 'resume enhancers' in Obama's mind. I think if he gets ONE headline that reads 'Obama Achieves Peace in the ME' or 'Obama Ends the REAL Cold War', he'll be happy. Damn the reality. IMO, Obama's the guy with 13k friends on FB that has no phone numbers saved on his phone.
3) If Russia is willing to help Iran with S300s, then what's our brilliant leader's next move??

If it wasn't so sad it'd be funny.

[MDS]

You're making the assumption that they have the same missiles they had back then. They don't.

Cuba never had nukes, Russia did. And Russia still does, they're just not keeping them in Cuba like back then. Remember that Russia only put the missiles in Cuba because the US put missiles in Turkey, actions that are echoed by NATO's expansion into the Baltics today. And then Russia only took the missiles out of Cuba because the US took our missiles out of Turkey. I think it's not entirely unreasonable to think that Russia might continue to escalate in this current game of chicken (again) until the US backs down (again.) In both cases, Russia's in a tight spot with limited options - and while cornering a less powerful adversary might be good strategy, it's a huge gamble to poke a big bear like that.