U.S.-Cuba talks: Looks like a one-way street
We keep hearing that the U.S. and Cuba are making progress on the so-called talks. I guess that it depends on what the meaning of "negotiations" or "progress" is.
So far, we've agreed to sit down with the Castro regime. This is huge, because every previous administration, from Kennedy to G.W. Bush, refused to meet unless certain conditions were met beforehand.
We've removed Cuba from the terrorist list. This is huge, especially since a couple of ships with illegal weapons have been discovered going to Cuba recently.
Which U.S. demands has Cuba agreed to? The answer is "nada," or nothing, as reported by Capitol Hill Cubans:
The road to establishing diplomatic relations has been a unilateral gift bag for the Castro regime.
Castro asks, Obama delivers.
- Ease sanctions -- check.
- Prisoner swap -- check.
- Remove Cuba from state-sponsors of terrorism list -- check.
- Find Castro a U.S. bank to process payments -- check.
- Seek to "change" U.S. democracy programs -- check.
- Skirt U.S. law in the process -- check.
And what has Castro done?
Nada.
It's infuriating, and I don't mean it as a Cuban-American who had a family member in one of Castro's political prisons for 14 years without a trial.

I am angry because we had all of the cards, especially now that Venezuela can no longer subsidize the Castro regime with oil. Raúl Castro is on his knees, without the Caracas subsidy and no country willing to offer him credit anymore.
We didn't have to make a deal for Alan Gross or send back spies sitting in U.S. prisons. We could have said, Put Gross on a plane to Miami, and we'll call you later.
We could have demanded the unconditional delivery of Joanne Chesimard, the woman who killed a New Jersey state trooper. From President Reagan to President G.W. Bush, we stopped talking whenever Castro refused to release her. The Obama team keeps talking despite Cuba saying that this issue is off the table. Sorry, but why are we still at the table?
Unfortunately, we've allowed Raúl Castro to rant about the embargo and Guantánamo. In the past, U.S. presidents hung up the phone when Raúl or Fidel ranted like that. Today, we listen to them, as if these are legitimate grievances that we should be sensitive to.
We remind you that this is the same administration negotiating a deal with Iran, a country far more consequential to our national security than Cuba.
The Obama administration can't negotiate a tough deal with Cuba. What makes me confident that they can do it with Iran?
P.S. You can hear my show (CantoTalk) or follow me on Twitter.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- The Net Neutrality Hydra: Twice Decapitated, Still Standing
- Cloward-Piven and the Migrant Invasion
- Acting on the Lessons of History
- Is Jamie Raskin Having a Psychotic Break?
- Mother or Monster?
- Donald Trump: Right Man, Right Moment
- Trump Means to Reduce China
- Islam Is Incompatible with Democracy
- ‘Maryland Man’ Not a Maryland Man
- If Rubio Doesn’t Act, He Risks Giving the CCP Dominance over South American Shipping
Blog Posts
- How Republicans can score an immigration victory
- Time for Pam Bondi to get a move on
- Protecting America’s rich Christian heritage
- Europe then and now
- From 'Trump is Hitler' to dark woke?
- Leftist judges (again) went on a rampage today
- Selfies with a corpse: Idiots take grinning cell phone photos with the body of Pope Francis, lying in state
- Buh-bye ActBlue! Trump set to sign memorandum targeting foreign dollars in American elections
- With the ‘Maryland father’ stunt failing, Democrats shift to the ‘disappeared’ Venezuelan
- Gunfight at the Oregon corral
- Sunny Hostin shreds Trump’s $5,000 ‘baby bonus’ idea as racial politics
- President Trump must secure a Canadian tariff framework deal this week
- LA government sends out ‘brush clearance’ warnings to property owners…months after their homes and businesses burned down
- To defuse the risk from unvetted illegal migrants, settle the Constitutional questions
- Restoring our national monuments and resurrecting U.S. historical truth