Jason Ian Poblete@JasonPoblete
From the @DropSiteNews interview/X post about their interview with Cuba's Deputy Foreign Minister:
" ... ➤ Cossío argues compensation should not be one-sided, saying Cuba “deserves to be compensated” for damages caused by the blockade, invasion attempts, and decades of U.S. actions..."
Here are at least three counterpoints that #Cuba always seems to omit when discussing certified claims and lump sum settlements:
1/The nationalization of American and other properties came first. Cuba seized American property without compensation beginning in 1960. America imposes an embargo. Cuba cannot simultaneously claim the right to expropriate under international law and refuse to meet the compensation standard that international law attaches to that right.
2/Fidel Castro made it a point to make a property settlement with the US close to impossible. Fidel knew our legal standard of prompt, adequate, and effective compensation, but not for the US. He did this by design. #Canada, #France, #Switzerland, #Spain, and nationals of other nations faced similar nationalizations of their citizens' and companies' property in Cuba. Just about all of them, that I know of, reached claims settlement agreements with Cuba between the late 1960s and early 1970s.
So what came after these expropriations and the US? And what came later? Nuclear missiles in Cuba. The Soviet satellite status was used to wage a Cold War on the US. Dead Americans. China's collaboration against the US. Much more.
The 1960s claims stand on their own, and Cosio knows it. America could pile on billions more to Cuba's $300 billion "counterclaim." But I digress ...
3/Cuba's $300 billion counterclaim has been presented politically — at the UN General Assembly, in diplomatic statements, and in domestic Cuban proceedings. Cossio knows this: there is no international court with compulsory jurisdiction over both parties where this claim could actually be adjudicated. The ICJ requires consent. There is no bilateral treaty creating a claims tribunal. The claim exists as political leverage, not as an actionable legal demand.
Cuba's Cossio @CubaMINREX is sophisticated enough to know that acknowledging the certified property claims as "legitimate matters" while simultaneously demanding $300 billion in damages under the embargo is not a legal argument — it is a negotiating position. I could go on, but that is enough for now. @lianystr
