Why the US War on Cuba?

[Judi Lynn]

12. If you'd bothered to do your homework looking for answers, you'd have learned the truth long ago.

It has been known, but ignored, and lied about that owners of properties in Cuba from Canada, France, Switzerland, Spain, the U.K. were compensated long ago. It has also been completely hidden that many greedy owners had claimed their properties were worth far less, for tax purposes, to avoid paying their proper shares, just as Donald Trump has done over the years.

Cuba used official records at the amount claimed by owners when compensation was offered. The US advised owners to refuse, and since then, the gigantic whopper that they were simply victimized by the new government, which provided them all, along with the US super-power, to use this lie as a reason for deep hostilities, and a reason to invade when the opportunity might arrive, which they did, with the Bay of Pigs, and they lost.

Owners in Canada, France, Spain, Switzerland, the U.K. settled decades ago, and any time you'd like to check it out, invest a little of your time researching the matter.

Quick reference:

Brooklyn Journal of International Law
Volume 42 | Issue 2
Article 11

6-1-2018
Charting a New Course in Cuba? Why the Time is
Now to Settle Outstanding American Property
Claims
Marco Antonio Dueñas



Part I of this Note will unpack the historical underpinnings,
as well as the consequences, of the expropriation of foreign and
domestic private property in Cuba. Part II will explore the various avenues of claims resolution proposed, pursued, and
achieved to date. First, there will be an analysis of the three major American proposals discussed in this Note: the Creighton Report, the Ashby Proposal, and the Feinberg Proposal. Next, it
will provide an overview of the Cuban position on outstanding
American and Cuban American claims, as well as the various
official (and unofficial) proposals that have come out of Cuba to
date. Additionally, it will examine five claims resolution settlements that Cuba has reached with countries other than the
United States, including Switzerland, Spain, France, Great Britain, and Canada. Part III will set forth an inclusive proposal for
settling the claims of three distinct groups: U.S. nationals, Cuban American exiles (resident in the United States and abroad),
and Cuban nationals (still in Cuba). Claims will be resolved
through the following three-tier framework of settlement mechanisms, including: restitution of nationalized American and Cuban American exile assets in Cuba, including improved and unimproved real property; bilateral trade agreements, including
development rights and tax incentives; and direct compensation,
including partial interest payments.

More:
https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1916&context=bjil

~ ~ ~

University of Miami Law School
Institutional Repository
University of Miami Inter-American Law Review
10-1-1973
The Settlement of Claims for Expropriated Private
Property Between Cuba and Foreign Nations
Other Than the United States
M. W. Gordon

. . .

Well before any negotiations were begun with Canada, Cuba entered
into the accords with France, Spain and Switzerland. The agreement
between Cuba and Spain, executed in 1967, has not been disclosed to the
public. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Madrid has stated that the
agreement itself prohibited the public disclosure of its terms without the
permission of both parties; only information of need to claimants may be
released. 14 While the Spanish accord provided for some form of compensation, recent discussions in Spain with several Madrid attorneys evidenced
their belief that payments had not yet been forthcoming from Cuba, some
six years after the accord was signed.

Trade statistics of Cuba and Spain support a view that Cuba might
have accepted a resolution with Spain which allowed for a larger pro-rata
settlement of claims of Spanish claimants than under the French or Swiss
accords. While Spain's trade with Cuba in 1960 was, at 20.8 million pesos,
less than trade with Canada, France, Japan and the United Kingdom, by
1963 Spain had become the major non-socialist trading partner of Cuba."
Trade increased slowly at first, approximately doubling in 1963 from the
1961 statistics. In 1964, however, Spain's trade with Cuba amounted to
107.1 billion pesos, a threefold increase over the previous year. Since then
the amount of trade with Spain has fluctuated but Spain has continued
to hold the lead in trade with Cuba among the non-socialist nations. 1

" It is
unlikely that Cuba could have agreed to a settlement of claims with France
and Switzerland, both less significant trading partners, without reaching
an accord with Spain. The non-disclosure of the agreement with Spain
may evidence that Cuba had to settle for a larger payment than it wished
to have disclosed to the public. Whether these observations are correct can
only be judged at a future time when the Spanish accord has been disclosed
to the public and when additional information is made available which will
establish the proportional relationship of the settlement amounts to the
total claims valuations filed in each nation.

The Spanish settlement in 1967 was executed in the same month as
the agreements with both France and Switzerland. Indeed, all were signed
in March within fourteen days of one another. The Cuban government
apparently had been unwilling to even discuss the matter of compensation
for the nationalizations of the property of any of the countries until late
LAWYER OF THE AMERICAS
1966.17 The thaw which did occur in late 1966, leading to the accords
with the three nations, does not suggest in the case of the Swiss agreement
that the thaw was particularly extensive. Cuba reached a favorable resolution with Switzerland by establishing a market for 40,000 tons of Cuban
sugar annually for eight years, while avoiding a requirement that the
Cuban government pay any definite lump sum settlement for the outstanding claim of individuals and insurance companies. France, contrastingly,
obtained a lump sum for the payment of all claims, not limited to specific
companies as in the Swiss accord.' 8 The French accord appears to be far
more favorable to France than the Swiss accord to Switzerland, although
it is impossible to determine the relative percentages which the agreed
upon payments represent in proportion to the total claims of the nationals
of each country.

The Swiss accord is conclusive only with respect to three Swiss owned
Cuban food processing enterprises, 19 all of which were nationalized by
Cuban law 890 on October 13, 1960.20 The agreed upon settlement of
18,039,000 Swiss francs was for indemnification of the nationalization of
the enterprises themselves, the payment of fees due to the entities prior to
nationalization and for the unauthorized use of brand names by the Cuban
government following the nationalizations3' The Swiss agreed to an eight
year quarterly payment schedule, with 1,752,360 Swiss francs due each
of the first three years, followed by five years of annual payments of
2,555,525 Swiss francs. 22 The stated annual payments would be supple.
mented by additional amounts in the event that further agreements were
reached resolving the claims of individuals and insurance companies.

More:
https://repository.law.miami.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2202&context=umialr

ETC., ETC., ETC.