What Became of the Arcos Undersea Cable Connection to Cuba? (2020) • Hacker News Board

Re: What Became of the Arcos Undersea Cable Connection to Cuba? (2020)

#51

Post by throwaway894345 » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 2:21 AM UTC

hakfoo wrote: post #50

throwaway894345 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

US sanctions exist to compell countries to make steps toward freedom, they don’t indicate a ranking of countries by freedom. Consequently the US will lift or ease sanctions toward a country that is progressing and impose or increase sanctions towards countries that regress. Of course there are many other factors—if US trade with a country isn’t important to that country, then the US is not likely to impose sanctions…

>US sanctions exist to compell countries to make steps toward freedom I think that argument depends on a fairly narrow, and largely private-property-centric model of "freedom". I don't think it will be elections or free media that would unlock the Cuban embargo, but rather privatization.

I have a hard time imagining Cubs becoming democratic and the US not lifting the embargo. We were already moving toward Cuba under Obama and Cuba wasn’t showing any signs of privatizing.

But in any case, the idea is that embargoes are about compulsion and not about judgment.

Re: What Became of the Arcos Undersea Cable Connection to Cuba? (2020)

#52

Post by dragonwriter » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 2:43 AM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #51

hakfoo wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>US sanctions exist to compell countries to make steps toward freedom I think that argument depends on a fairly narrow, and largely private-property-centric model of "freedom". I don't think it will be elections or free media that would unlock the Cuban embargo, but rather privatization.

I have a hard time imagining Cubs becoming democratic and the US not lifting the embargo. We were already moving toward Cuba under Obama and Cuba wasn’t showing any signs of privatizing. But in any case, the idea is that embargoes are about compulsion and not about judgment.

> I have a hard time imagining Cubs becoming democratic and the US not lifting the embargo.

You haven't paid much attention to US policy toward Latin America: favorable policy is driven by being a capitalism and pro-US geopolitical orientation together, not democracy.

> We were already moving toward Cuba under Obama and Cuba wasn’t showing any signs of privatizing.

Both Obama and Clinton made steps toward normalization; neither of those prices durable, and lots of Dems, even who agree on the policy, think those steps were bad politics that have hurt Dems, particularly in Florida. I think Biden would nevertheless be inclined to say least an initial opening toward an opening with Cuba in the event of a democratic transition. But domestic politics either going into or resulting from the outcome of the 2022 midterms might effect that significantly, especially in the event that a faction not favorable to the neoliberal capitalism and US geopolitical capitalism won, or seemed likely to win, in that democracy.

Re: What Became of the Arcos Undersea Cable Connection to Cuba? (2020)

#53

Post by throwaway894345 » Mon, Jul 19, 2021, 2:56 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #52

throwaway894345 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a hard time imagining Cubs becoming democratic and the US not lifting the embargo. We were already moving toward Cuba under Obama and Cuba wasn’t showing any signs of privatizing. But in any case, the idea is that embargoes are about compulsion and not about judgment.

> I have a hard time imagining Cubs becoming democratic and the US not lifting the embargo. You haven't paid much attention to US policy toward Latin America: favorable policy is driven by being a capitalism and pro-US geopolitical orientation together, not democracy. > We were already moving toward Cuba under Obama and Cuba wasn’t showing any signs of privatizing. Both Obama and Clinton made steps toward normalizati…

The US has different policy goals for different countries. The professed Cuban focus has been on democracy and human rights; it would be politically very difficult for the US to justify its embargo if Cuba becomes democratic and restores Cubans' rights to vote, speak, protest, travel, etc freely.

> especially in the event that a faction not favorable to the neoliberal capitalism and US geopolitical capitalism won, or seemed likely to win, in that democracy.

There's no real scenario in which Cuba becomes a democratic country but retains its hostile relationship with America. Any democratic revolution is going to be supported by the US because the US wants to ensure friendly relations with the new government for its own interests (e.g., trade). Moreover, even in the extremely unlikely event that democratic Cuba is hostile toward US interests, it's even more unlikely that they would stay that way because ordinary Cubans (like all 2nd world countries) want access to the 1st world lifestyle and the elite will want access to US markets, so internal pressure will favor more open trade with the US and even if the US is run by greedy capitalists (and I think it is to a large extent) it's in their interest to lift the embargo on a democratic Cuba.