Thursday, February 21, 2008

Odds and ends

Lots of Cuba coverage, some prompted by the Fidel resignation. Samples:

  • Reuters looks at the future of property disputes, interviewing attorney Nick Gutierrez, whose comments on residential property are a lot smarter than the Bush Administration’s. “No one can be evicted from homes even if they're not theirs. The right of possession has to be respected,” he said.

  • The Economist has a detailed, unsentimental look at the politics of succession, economic conditions, Venezuelan aid, and prospects for reform. A prediction: “Foreign investment and small business will be encouraged again.” (H/t: Penultimos Dias)

  • Writing in Salon, Kirk Nielsen surveys the three Miami Congressional races. Whether these races will be competitive depends, among other things, on support from the national Democratic Party, a factor absent in past election cycles. “The DCCC has already funded Spanish-language radio attack ads targeting all three incumbents for voting against the expansion of the federal State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP),” Nielsen writes.

  • Another step in Cuba’s diplomacy in Latin America, this time on the commercial side: a rescheduling of $400 in debt owed to Mexico, proceeds to be used to finance Mexican exports to Cuba. Terms were not disclosed. Bloomberg coverage here.


theCardinal said...

The Economist also has an excellent piece on Castro's Legacy

Anonymous said...

Hola, Phil Peters, soy reportera del diario brasileño Folha de S. Paulo y quería entrevistarlo sobre Cuba. En que número puedo llamar?
Muchas gracias,

theCardinal said...

el telefono del Lexington Institute es 703-522-5828. Me imagino que te pueden conectar con el.

Anonymous said...

Hey Phil, look like the Brazilians want you to trash U.S. policy towards the last dictatorship in the Americas...go get 'em!

why get a Brazilian to do it when you can get a real americano???

Anonymous said...

cuban americans, who came here in the first wave, NEVER deserve their property back.

Anonymous said...

Properties in Cuba were not confiscated based on merits or demerits or virtue or lack of it. Who are those who came here in "the first wave"? How do you define the first wave, how many years? What makes those Cubans different regarding their confiscation of their property from other Cubans? Besides, who is going to make that decision? I don't think Cubans are interested in getting old, dilapidated houses back. For other properties which were actually confiscated, there may be compensation. But I would not dare say who should and who should not receive it.

theCardinal said...

My parents came in the first wave and while they lost a great deal (we all say that don't we?) my parents have zero interest in getting anything back. That being said I could not help but be incensed by the comments of the third anonymous post. What annoyed me what's implicit in the statement about first wave Cubans. Both of my parents were basically apolitical - my mom willing to accept any change from Batista and my carefree Dad, who knew Fidel from his University days, adopting an "anyone but Fidel" stance. So you would wish to penalize my father for being smarter than 90% of the Cuban populace? The only reason my dad even left was thanks to a one-time Castroite friend who told him what to expect if he stayed just another week more.

So to the cowardly anonymous - I say kindly - bite me. It's easy for you to sit here and judge crap you don't know. It's easy to talk when you haven't lived it. I thank God everyday that I am an American, that I don't have to fear what my parents had to live through. That I don't have leave all that I have - all that I love to start afresh in a place I've never been surrounded by people I don't know.