Cuba
- All
- Africa
- Americas
- Central America & Caribbean
- Antigua & Barbuda
- Antilles
- Bahamas
- Barbados
- Belize
- Bermuda
- Cayman Islands
- Costa Rica
- Cuba
- Dominica
- Dominican Republic
- El Salvador
- Grenada
- Guatemala
- Haiti
- Honduras
- Jamaica
- Montserrat
- Nicaragua
- Panama
- Puerto Rico
- St. Lucia
- St. Barts
- St. Kitts & Nevis
- St. Vincent
- Trinidad & Tobago
- Turks & Caicos
- Virgin Islands
- North America
- South America
- Central America & Caribbean
- Asia
- Europe
- Middle East
- Russia & FSU
- Global Commons
- Africa
- Americas
- Asia
- Europe
- Middle East
- Russia & FSU
- Global Commons
- previous-disabled
- Page 1of 5
- next
In a recent article, R.M. Schneiderman suggested that U.S. pro-democracy programs were responsible for prolonging the sentence of Alan Gross, an American currently being held in a Cuban prison. But given the Cuban regime’s history of biting any hand extended in friendship, now is not the time to cancel the programs or to make any other concessions.
On the campaign trail in 2008, Obama often said that he wanted a new beginning with Cuba. Yet with the president set to begin his second term, the relationship between the two countries remains largely unchanged. The single biggest reason for the status quo, according to the White House, is the dispute about Alan Gross, a U.S. citizen serving out 15-year prison sentence in Havana.
Halting Iran's progress toward a bomb will require the United States to make credible promises and credible threats simultaneously -- an exceedingly difficult trick to pull off. For coercive diplomacy to work, Washington may need to put more of its cards on the table.
Graham Allison unduly credits Kennedy’s use of threats in resolving the Cuban missile crisis, argues James Nathan. Allison disagrees, pointing to the case of Iran, where only the prospect of an attack can convince the country to abandon its nuclear ambitions.
Fifty years ago, the Cuban missile crisis brought the world to the brink of nuclear disaster. Every president since John F. Kennedy has tried to learn from what happened back then. Today, it can help U.S. policymakers understand what to do -- and what not to do -- about Iran, North Korea, China, and presidential decision-making in general.
The Sixth Summit of the Americas in Cartagena had an ambitious agenda, but Washington's inability to agree with the rest of Latin America on how to include Cuba left the high-level gathering largely a bust.
When Pope Benedict XVI visits Cuba next month, he will reinforce a strategy that the Vatican has allowed the local Catholic Church there to pursue for more than three decades: avoid confronting the Castro regime, collaborate with Havana to combat the U.S.-led embargo, and support the Cuban government’s incremental economic reforms. In exchange, the Church gets the space to rebuild its presence for the possible post-Castro economic boom times to come.
Cubans want the United States to lift its long-standing embargo on Cuba, but any serious easing of trade and travel restrictions between the two countries may badly harm Cuba's health-care industry.
The smooth transfer of power from Fidel Castro to his successors is exposing the willful ignorance and wishful thinking of U.S. policy toward Cuba. The post-Fidel transition is already well under way, and change in Cuba will come only gradually from here on out. With or without Fidel, renewed U.S. efforts to topple the revolutionary regime in Havana can do no good -- and have the potential to do considerable harm.
On the very day U.S. forces entered Iraq last March, Fidel Castro launched a major crackdown on Cuban dissidents; 75 have since been imprisoned. Just why he chose to crush the reformers remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: his country may be crumbling, but the commandante's grip on power remains as tight as ever.
- previous-disabled
- Page 1of 5
- next
