Is China more open since, say 1989?

BTW, Ginny is right about the diplomatic invitations, a point which reinforces my argument.

And I don’t know whether the US embargo is a good idea, but it’s not what’s keeping Castro in power. Castro remains in power for two reasons: 1) he has a local monopoly on force and uses it, and 2) the US doesn’t think it’s worth overthrowing him. I doubt that the embargo has much effect either way, especially since many countries ignore it.

About your last point: I assume that you are referring to the Helms-Burton law, which IMO is a morally and politically justified law. It is intended to discourage non-US citizens from trafficking in property that Castro stole from Cuban citizens, some of whom now live in the USA. I realize that many Europeans and Canadians consider this US policy to be somehow silly and unjust (to them). However, I have never heard a defense of the European view that was based on anything other than the short-term expediency of European business people. Indeed I am astonished that some Europeans think that there is nothing wrong with doing business with a regime whose assets are entirely the product of theft.

I think Vaclav Havel’s main criticism still stands i.e. the EU has granted Castro veto power over whom the EU invites to its embassies. No matter how nobel their goals, they are conforming their moral standards to the dictator not the other way around.

The EU has a bigger carrot with which to influence Cuba than any other entity but it refuses to use that power aggressively. I’m with Havel on this. It looks like old habit die hard.

Also, your syntax implies the prisoners were arrested in June and many have been released in the time between then and now; they were arrested (clearly with an eye toward the US) in April 2003, shortly after three were executed for the crime of wanting to leave that island of high literacy and universal health care, the model state.

I agree that it is distasteful, but then again, taking a hard line is no solution eithe. Without the American trade embargo Castro would probably long gone; trade is the best cway to open up societies. I also don’t see what self-interest the EU is supposed to pursue here. The representatives of businesses that invest in property owned by Cuban exiles usually are barred from entering the United States; that’s a pretty effective deterrent.

you might want to look at this:

BRUSSELS, Belgium · European Union foreign ministers agreed Monday to restore normal diplomatic relations with the Cuban government while pledging to increase contacts with critics of President Fidel Castro.

…

But the EU insisted it would continue to raise human rights issues and demanded the “urgent” and “unconditional” release of all dissidents, including the 75 given prison terms of up to 28 years in 2003.

EU ends freeze on Cuba relations – Bloc still intends to increase ties with dissidents

I think this is a tempest in a teapot, as usual, especially since the measure is strictly temporary, as I have read elsewhere, depending on Cuba being on its best behavior.

The whole piece is worth reading (short but, well, uplifting). I never tire of Havel, he runs such a counter to the usual European nihilism.

By the way, The Diplomad is bitter (isn’t he always, but spending a life observing such maneuvers must be kind of like a life of bartending – you don’t see the best in the human race), but he also gives more context.

And, yes, Havel needs to be Secretary General. (See earlier post.)

They know he’s going, they want to sign the contracts before our Cuban-Americans go back.