| Author |
|
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4548
|
| Posted: 18 December 2014 at 7:25pm | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
Wilson, the trade embargo has not been lifted. It's up to Congress to do that, so there's no way it's going to happen as long as the Republicans are in control... If for no other reason than doing so would make them look like they agreed with Obama.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brad Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 December 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1713
|
| Posted: 18 December 2014 at 7:37pm | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
By the same logic, we should also open ties with Iran and North Korea. Clearly our embargoes have not caused their respective chaotic downfalls. But we don't. Why not? All three still have oppressive regimes that do not allow free speech.
I have two theories as to why this was done.
1) President Obama REALLY wanted to smoke a Cuban cigar.
or
2) He wanted to get those Cuban Americans to stop voting Republican in Florida (which they do at a higher percentage than other Latino Americans).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4548
|
| Posted: 18 December 2014 at 8:17pm | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Brad, this move is most certainly not going to curry favor with Cuban Americans in Florida. To the contrary, as many of them are exiles, they are more likely to be angered by it.
And it's not like the US had a consistent policy of not having diplomatic relations with repressive dictatorships. We have relations with China, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe, and Vietnam, among others. If we do with them, why not Cuba?
And no cigars unless Congress acts, which is not happening anytime soon.
Edited by Jason Czeskleba on 18 December 2014 at 8:25pm
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joseph Gauthier
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 11 March 2009
Posts: 1415
|
| Posted: 18 December 2014 at 11:05pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
I agree with Jason. This is certainly not a move meant to appeal to Cuban-Americans. And given the odd timing-- with Venezuela on the brink of collapse and Russia facing similar pressure --I can only conceive of three possible motivations:
1. To help ensure the survival of the Communist Party of Cuba.
2. To help the Cuban people avoid a second Special Period.
3. To provide the president with a personally desired headline, and a desired legacy item.
The first, of course, seems highly unlikely, though the policy change does make the survival of the Communist party more likely.
The Second, while laudable, would ultimately be misguided. A collapse in Caracas would mean a collapse of the Communist Party in Cuba, opening the possibility of full cooperation with the US and a true friendship between the American and Cuban people.
Therefore, the third motivation seems the most likely to me; and perhaps, the most vile. A President's personal vanity is no foundation upon which a national policy can or should be built. And if this change in policy is indeed motivated by the president's desire to achieve a favored legacy item, it still begs the following two questions:
1. Why is the change in policy a desired legacy item?
2. And why now? (Not just why not after the fall of Caracas? But also why not before now?)
I think the answers to those questions might be very interesting.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14816
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 12:03am | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
QUOTE:
Brad, this move is most certainly not going to curry favor with
Cuban Americans in Florida. To the contrary, as many of them are
exiles, they are more likely to be angered by it. |
|
|
Recent polls show that more Cuban-Americans favor lifting the
embargo than do not, with younger generations being more strongly in
favor.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4548
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 12:15am | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
I don't think creating a "desired legacy item" is a significant motivator, because I don't think this move is going to be particularly popular. I would propose a less cynical motivation: Obama might simply believe this policy change is the right thing to do. As to the timing, I suspect there may be political motivation there in the sense that this move is unlikely to convey any political advantage, and instead is likely to be a point of political attack for his opponents. Therefore, it makes sense for him to have waited until after the election to implement it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Michael Roberts
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 20 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14816
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 12:17am | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
As for "why not before now", reportedly the death of Hugo Chavez was
what prompted the U.S. and Cuba to start talking again, probably a sign
that Cuba lacks faith in Maduro's ability to continue Venezuela's
assistance.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Brad Hague
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 December 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1713
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 4:42pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
My post was more in jest, but I am finding this topic very interesting. Thank you all for your thoughts and insights, even when on opposite sides of opinion.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Joe Zhang
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 12857
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 6:05pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
One less spot in the world the warmongers of America can look forward to playing their games in. Good.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Jason Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2473
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 6:32pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Re: why'd he do it? Here's five possibilities:
http://inthesetimes.com/article/17472/why_cuba_why_now
I'm glad it happened regardless. Now, time to end the embargo. If the U.S. can trade with China and Vietnam, why not Cuba?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Carmen Bernardo
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 August 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 3666
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 8:02pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Rand Paul actually stated something along those lines in his support for lifting the embargo this week. Given what I've learned about the situations when Marxists take over, nearly all of the movements where this has taken place have been more of a nationalistic flavor, with the Marxist philosophies being more of a window-dressing for how the revolutionary regime actually works.
Look at North Korea. They call themselves "communists", but the practice of the regime seems more like a hereditary monarchy than anything we've seen in the old Soviet Union, mainland China and most other Marxist/Socialist states. The Castros seem to be working out the same way. Makes me wonder what would happen if Raúl kicks the bucket (the brothers seem to have not chosen a successor, unlike Chavez down in Venezuela).
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jason Schulman
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 08 July 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2473
|
| Posted: 19 December 2014 at 10:33pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Carmen's right that the nationalism of these states is far more important than the "Marxism." North Korea actually no longer has any mention of Marxism-Leninism or Communism in its constitution. Its official ideology is "Juche," which means "self-reliance." And indeed, North Korea is almost completely autarkic (I think it engages in trade with China).
The Chinese and Vietnamese Communist Parties are clearly presiding over transitions to full-blown capitalism (not entirely complete yet). There are still school departments where "Marxism" is taught but I doubt that anyone believes that how the regimes behave has any relation to what's in the texts.
In Cuba, since the USSR fell apart, the Cuban CP's nationalism has been much pronounced than it's commitment to Marxism-Leninism.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
