Latin America
Related: About this forumPayback Doesn’t Pay Back: U.S.-Cuba Compensation Claims and the Difficulties of Negotiation
Payback Doesnt Pay Back: U.S.-Cuba Compensation Claims and the Difficulties of Negotiation
August 12, 2016
By Zachary Cohen and Patrick Denenea, Research Associates at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs
Before 1959, three-fourths of Cubas arable land was owned by U.S. corporations and citizens.[1] The two nations were so tightly bound that Cubas economic policies were practically guided by U.S. interests alone. However, after Dictator Fulgencio Batista was deposed in the 1959 Cuban Revolution, Cubas economic relationship with the United States was shattered. As part of a process of nationalization, the new Cuban government seized land and factories owned by foreign companies and Cubans who fled to the United States, and in retaliation, the United States issued a strict embargo that continues to constrain Cubas economic potential today. Although diplomatic relations have gradually been re-established over the past several years through environmental agreements and the reopening of both embassies, a number of contentious economic grievances remind both countries of their Cold War past.[2]
The first round of talks were held in Havana, Cuba, on December 8, 2015, and while the initial meeting can be considered a positive diplomatic move, it was less of a negotiation than a preliminary discussion to establish the facts and specific demands. The second round, held on July 28-29 of this year, allowed for more substantive debate. The process of negotiations remains ongoing, and both countries seek to resolve the claims as quickly as possible, according to a U.S. State Department Official.[3]
Although concessions are not the most pressing issue on the table, the settlement of claims is necessary before full normalization of relations, due to the Helms-Burton Act. This 1996 law stipulates that the satisfactory resolution of property claims
remains an essential condition for the full resumption of economic and diplomatic relations between Cuba and the United States.[4] According to a Brookings report on the concessions, Helms-Burton formally wrote into law the linkage between compensation and normalization of relations, meaning that the United States sought to create a permanent strong-armed policy toward Cuba and legislatively cement the claims.[5] The law is thus indicative of a larger issue at hand; the United States has consistently undermined its own relationship with Cuba through counter-productive policies, which have had vast and long-lasting consequences.
The historical and political disputes that surround the issue of claims are so numerous that it is unlikely that substantial progress will be achieved anytime soon. Through an exploration of the nature of the demands and their historical roots in anti-communist ideology, it becomes evident that the United States is primarily responsible for the hostility that remains today.
More:
http://www.coha.org/33399-2/
Good Reads:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016165849