Why the Internet in Cuba Has Become a US Political Hot Potato (theguardian.com) 48
After Havana shut down online access for 72 hours, the battle is on to keep the country connected. From a report: Cubans used to joke about Napoleon Bonaparte chatting to Mikhail Gorbachev, George W Bush and Fidel Castro in the afterlife. "If I'd have had your prudence, I'd never have fought Waterloo," the French emperor tells the last Soviet leader. "If I'd have had your military might, I'd have won Waterloo," he tells the Texan. Turning last to Castro, the emperor says: "If I'd have had Granma [the Cuban Communist party daily], I'd have lost Waterloo but nobody would have known." The joke no longer does the rounds.
With millions of Cubans now online, the state's monopoly on mass communication has been deeply eroded. But after social media helped catalyse historic protests on the island last month, the government temporarily shut the internet down. Full connectivity returned 72 hours later, but the issue has become a hot potato in the US. Hundreds of Cuban-Americans marched against the regime in Washington last week, and politicians are trying to leverage political capital: Florida senator Marco Rubio has called for the US to beam balloon-supplied internet to the island nation, while Joe Biden said his administration is assessing whether it can increase Cuba's connectivity. Experts say it's unclear how internet access could be increased at scale if the host nation is unwilling to cooperate.
"I haven't seen anything other than pie in the sky," said Larry Press, professor of information systems at California State University. Past US government attempts to bolster connectivity in Cuba read like a John Le Carre novel. In 2009, Alan Gross, a subcontractor for the US Agency for International Development, was arrested for distributing satellite equipment. His work was funded thanks to a US law that explicitly calls for the overthrow of the Castro regime. (Gross was later released as part of the restoration of US-Cuban relations during Barack Obama's second term.) Attempts to smuggle satellite ground stations disguised as surf boards on to the island were similarly foiled.
With millions of Cubans now online, the state's monopoly on mass communication has been deeply eroded. But after social media helped catalyse historic protests on the island last month, the government temporarily shut the internet down. Full connectivity returned 72 hours later, but the issue has become a hot potato in the US. Hundreds of Cuban-Americans marched against the regime in Washington last week, and politicians are trying to leverage political capital: Florida senator Marco Rubio has called for the US to beam balloon-supplied internet to the island nation, while Joe Biden said his administration is assessing whether it can increase Cuba's connectivity. Experts say it's unclear how internet access could be increased at scale if the host nation is unwilling to cooperate.
"I haven't seen anything other than pie in the sky," said Larry Press, professor of information systems at California State University. Past US government attempts to bolster connectivity in Cuba read like a John Le Carre novel. In 2009, Alan Gross, a subcontractor for the US Agency for International Development, was arrested for distributing satellite equipment. His work was funded thanks to a US law that explicitly calls for the overthrow of the Castro regime. (Gross was later released as part of the restoration of US-Cuban relations during Barack Obama's second term.) Attempts to smuggle satellite ground stations disguised as surf boards on to the island were similarly foiled.
I was being facetious (Score:4, Insightful)
We can't even use the excuse that they're run by a dictator. The Saudis freakin' monarchs and we're best buds with them. And is anyone here going to say our "Most Favored Nation" China is a Democracy?
It's all about money and power. And it's all so damn transparent.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't think anyone's naïve enough to believe we're not actively trying to do "regime change" in Cuba.
Does anyone deny that regime change is America's goal?
We can't even use the excuse that they're run by a dictator. The Saudis freakin' monarchs and we're best buds with them.
We can oppose a dictator without opposing all dictators.
And is anyone here going to say our "Most Favored Nation" China is a Democracy?
"Most Favored Nation" just means normal WTO trading terms.
Neither Saudis nor Chinese are oppressed as much as Cubans. They both have the most important freedom: The freedom to leave. Cuba is a prison.
Re: (Score:2)
They both have the most important freedom: The freedom to leave. Cuba is a prison.
Unless China government decides not to let you leave. Law coming to HK soon possibly.
https://www.france24.com/en/li... [france24.com]
Canada warned its citizens on Thursday that Hong Kong authorities can prevent people leaving the city under a new law that has raised fears of Chinese mainland-style exit bans.
And it also states that China too prevents you from leaving whenever they don't want you to leave.
Last I heard about Saudi, if you are a female, you can't leave the country without permission from a male of your family
Re: (Score:2)
Chinese are much more oppressed than Cubans... but China is powerful, is economically important for the USA and it is not a big thorn in the USA control area.
Even with all the effort from USA, Cuba with the longest embargo than any country, and while with many problems, is still in better state than almost all countries around the same area. If it wasn't the USA embargo, Cuba would probably be a perfect role model for the surrounding countries and the over-watch communist regime would evolve to something el
I don't think we can (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the Cuban government, bereft of its go-to excuse for any failure, would likely have collapsed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because we aren't the source of Cuba's problems, but we are a very visible excuse for the regime's failings.
Re:It's because of the Electoral College (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry what do you mean by that? Why would lifting us sanctions and normalizing relations cause the Cuban country to collapse?
Because the Cuban regime would lack an external enemy as a scapegoat for all their internal problems. They could no longer demonize dissidents as traitors.
America has vilified and isolated only two countries for more than 60 years:
1. Cuba
2. North Korea
Only two communist regimes still endure after 60 years:
1. Cuba
2. North Korea
Do you see a pattern?
America's policy of isolation has been a disaster for the Cuban and N. Korean people, but a godsend for the regimes.
Re: (Score:2)
exactly!
USA is still playing the hard hand and while that worked in other countries where internal opposition was already high, for Cuba and N.Korea they fail to get traction. Bay of pigs invasion is the perfect example.
Even the Chinese communist regime changed (while still not enough) with more openness.
USA can still embargo top leaders, with of course more annoying results than starve them, but improving population life always improve their live goals and self-awareness and with time change the regime
Just
Starlink (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Since the Starlink dishes seem to be geolocked (at least currently) smuggling them into Cuba probably isn't a solution unless you can get Musk to authorize it.
Re: (Score:2)
...unless you can get Musk to authorize it.
Have you tried asking? This seems like a trivial problem to solve compared with getting thousands of satellites into orbit.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not going to bother asking since I don't care if Cubans get Starlink dishes or not. 8^)
I was only pointing out that just smuggling dishes into the country isn't enough you would also need to get the participation of Musk in order for Starlink to be a viable option.
Re: (Score:2)
Did you not read the part in the summary about people getting busted over smuggling in satellite dishes?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Geography for politicians. (Score:5, Interesting)
Interference with Cuba is an act of war.
"Interference" with another country is not inherently an "act of war" as that term is traditionally defined. Of course, sovereign nations can choose to get as pissed as they want about whatever they choose, and declare anything to be an "act of war" in their judgment. But providing communications to citizens is not something which would usually be considered so.
If your implication is that the US is morally wrong for trying to give Cubans free access to the Internet, against their government's wishes, I humbly suggest that your moral compass is severely defective. Free and open communications are a fundamental human right, and governments which deny their citizens the means to communicate are oppressive.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Is blockading the country an Act of War? (Score:2)
Trick question, it's not an act of war if the other country can't fight back.
I don't think I'd be as annoyed with all this if the US was honest, but we act like we're spreading freedom while we coddle up with dictators. [wikipedia.org]
This isn't just me being a whiny liberal either. If we're willing to act this way with other countries what makes you think we won't do the same to US Citizens?
Re: (Score:3)
Where do you, morally, draw the line on action?
Country A doesn't like the internal actions of Country B's government - where does it have a right to act? Where does that right to act end? Its another, sovereign, country, what gives Country A the right to act within Country B's borders?
Imagine it this way - right now there are a number of US states which restrict or are attempting to restrict the right of a woman to have a choice regarding her own body when it comes to abortion. Does that give another cou
Re: (Score:2)
If your implication is that the US is morally wrong for trying to give Cubans free access to the Internet (...)
While at the same time depriving them from anything through the embargo...
Citation needed (Score:2)
The burden is on you to support your assertion.
Under what specific law(s) is "interference" (a nebulous term) an act of war? How is "distributing connectivity" (the user can choose what to access) an act of war? Under which Convention or other agreement to which the US is signatory?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Providing internet is not an act of war. It's just an extension of the long running world wide practice of making sure plenty of shortwave and medium wave radio signals are available across the border (any border). Radio Moscow, Voice of America, and the BBC World service are not acts of war.
Scooby Snacks (Score:1)
Sounds like a plot from a Saturday morning kids' drama.
Re: (Score:2)
US still trying to overthrow cuba... (Score:2, Informative)
... see here:
https://www.antiwar.com/blog/2... [antiwar.com]
It is simple (Score:1)
Re:It is simple (Score:4, Informative)
It's simpler than that, and it's not about democracy. The Republican Party sees appeasing the large and vocal Cuban exile community as crucial to their chances of winning Florida's 29 electoral votes every four years.
The Cubans, in turn, are largely supporters (or their descendants) of the dictator Fulgencio Batista that fled Cuba after the revolution.
Yay! Miniblimp to the rescue! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this the Blimp of which you speak?
https://keysweekly.com/42/fat-... [keysweekly.com]
I had not heard about this, so wanted to see some pictures of the blimp to see what you meant, and this is what came up.
Re: (Score:1)
Embargo (Score:5, Insightful)
Biggest thing I learned from this (Score:3)
Is that Cuba *had* working internet. I always assumed it was heavily censored, plus most of the population could not get devices that would display it. Both obviously false based on the fact that these new actions are changes from before and easily observed by the population.
I don't know what this says about the accuracy of news, or my attention to it, that I was so far off base.
US should increase connectivity within itself (Score:1)
US already has many areas with either only low speed internet or no internet itself.
Shouldnt they be fixing that first before spending money increasing connectivity / speed elsewhere?
lol
Hypocrisy in action. (Score:1)