August 27, 2005
U.S. Land Seized in Cuba
No, this is not a headline from the 1960s. And, no, it doesn't deal with Guantanamo. It appears that one U.S. company kept property in Cuba until only two years ago.
The company is Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide - owners of Sheraton Hotels - and they filed a complaint with the U.S. Justice Department for land seized by Cuba in 2003.
This article in the Miami Herald provides the details:
U.S. hotel firm's land seized only recently
It turns out that Fidel Castro's government didn't seize all foreign-owned property decades ago. Land owned by a U.S. firm was taken only recently.
BY FRANCES ROBLES
frobles@herald.com
Four decades after Fidel Castro's government had apparently seized all foreign-owned properties in Cuba, it now turns out that a U.S. telephone company retained some 400 acres of land in and around Havana until just two years ago.
News of the surprising landholdings came after Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide -- owners of the Sheraton hotel chain -- filed a complaint last week with the U.S. Justice Department for $63 million worth of land it said the Cuban government seized in 2003 from a Starwood subsidiary.
''The land belongs to us. They can't take it,'' said Ignacio Sánchez, a Washington lawyer who represents Starwood. ``The Cuban government basically said to go pound sand.''
The claim startled Cuba experts and some U.S. government officials, who were unaware that any American company still owned land in Cuba. Castro nationalized virtually all foreign-owned properties in 1960, from land to sugar mills to factories.
Starwood's land was owned by Radio Corporación Cubana (RCC), a company established in Cuba in 1922 as a subsidiary of the International Telephone and Telegraph Corp. In 1998, Starwood acquired ITT's ownership of RCC.
RCC used the land for a transmitting station, buildings and equipment needed for international telephone service until 1992, when Hurricane Andrew knocked out the Florida side of the phone service. The property remained largely unused until 2003, when both the land and RCC were seized.
PHONE SERVICE
The Cuban government probably didn't seize the land in the 1960s because it wanted the telephone service to continue, according to people close to the case. But why the Cubans didn't seize the properties after the phone service stopped in 1992 remains a mystery, they added.
By the time Castro's government got around to seizing the land -- citing ''hostile laws and policies of the U.S. government'' -- the U.S. commission that fielded complaints from U.S. citizens who had lost property in the 1960s had long closed its books.
The commission, which was created in 1967 and shut down in 1972, certified some 6,000 claims totaling $1.8 billion. With a 6 percent interest, that now stands as a $6 billion tab. Among the biggest claimants were North American Sugar and United Fruit Sugar Co.
''This is a policy of looking out for citizens when facing a government that is taking properties,'' said Mauricio J. Tamargo, chairman of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission. ``There will be a day when the U.S. and Cuba normalize relations and for that to occur, there has to be a settlement, and that has to be paid.''
To address Starwood's recent seizure, the commission has reopened, paving the way for a claim by the hotel chain and any other U.S. citizen or company whose properties have been taken.
''Cuba was not to be reasoned with,'' Sánchez said, 'so the company availed itself of its rights and went to the federal government, saying, `Here's another confiscation after 40 some-odd years.' ''
UNPRECEDENTED
Experts in Cuba property issues said reopening the claims commission for the benefit of one company is unprecedented. The move was welcomed by attorneys and claimants, even if few recent claims are likely.
The rules for filing a claim against Cuba are strict. The applicant must be a U.S. citizen or company at the time the property is taken. And it must have been seized after May 1967.
Attorney Robert Muse, an expert in Cuba trade issues, said applicants could include, for example, Cubans who arrived during the Mariel boat lift, became U.S. citizens, and then had family property seized after the death of a loved one.
''It is extraordinary that a program would be created for a single company,'' Muse said. ``They are potentially creating a very large Cuban-American program here. Did they know that when they created a special program for one company?''
Continue reading below for a list of assets seized from Starwood.
Starwood Hotels and Resorts says the Cuban government has seized the following:
• 1.2 million square meters in Cabañas, adjacent to Havana's José Martí International airport, worth $36 million
• 880,000 square meters in a lot called La Finca Margarita four miles south of Havana, $26.4 million
• 18,733 square meters in Guanabo 15 miles east of Havana, valued at $749,320
• Salvador Allende St. office space, $543,000
• Bank account, $30,000
• Office furniture and equipment, $10,000
Posted by Robert M at August 27, 2005 12:39 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.babalublog.com/cgi-bin/mt/hut.cgi/2151
Comments
I think something is getting lost in the confusion. These folks who had their land seized. Will OFAC and the US Dept. of the Treasury, as well as the Commerce Department go after them for "trading with the enemy" these past 46 years?
Or will this conveniently get over looked since they are a "business" such as these many states that can get around the embargo?
Posted by: pototo at August 27, 2005 09:52 PM
Further proof of the hypocrisy of the US policy on Cuba, IMO.
Posted by: Mani at August 28, 2005 01:51 PM
Poor Cuba! When she is at last free of Communist oppression, she will be confronted with billions of dollars of exaggerated claims from U.S. corporations seeking to mortgage the island for the next 1000 years; and the U.S. government, of course, will press these claims far more aggressively than it ever pursued the democratization of Cuba. These very companies were Castro's biggest financial supporters before 1959, buying millions of revolutionary "bonds" to insure favored treatment by the new regime. Some, it now appears, continued to be Castro's partners after 1959; and now that the relationship has soured, hope to collect their losses from the beleaguered Cuban people.
It is tragic to remember that Cuba once had no foreign debt (now it has the largest foreign debt per capita in the world) and required no financial aid from the U.S. or any other country.
The supposedly "anti-American" regime of Fidel Castro has laid the foundation for the economic strangulation of a post-Castro Cuba by U.S. corporations. Real Cuban nationalism requires us to oppose the takeover of our country by foreigners -- any foreigners.
Posted by: M.A.T. at August 28, 2005 06:04 PM
M.A.T.
1. Castro is truly "anti-American".
2. I must agree with you regarding the "Real Cuban nationalism requires us to oppose the takeover of our country by foreigners -- any foreigners."
I've been singing this song for years. Regrettably some of our Cuban brothers and sisters have shifted their loyaties. No matter what the condition physically or financially Cuba must remain in Cuban hands. If Cuba becomes a U.S. or any other country's possession then I have truly lost my country forever.
Posted by: pototo at August 28, 2005 09:45 PM
What I mean, pototo, is that Castro is not authentically in the tradition of Cuban anti-Americanism, which meant only the affirmation of our sovereignty against the constant intrusions of the regional hagemon (the United States). Castro's brand of anti-Americanism goes far beyond nationalism to encompass the destruction of the hagemon and the enslavement of the other hemispheric states. Authentic Cuban anti-Americanism benefits both Cuba and the United States: Cuba, obviously; and the U.S., because it has never been in its genuine interest to win converts to democracy by making its neighbors subserviant to its will and maintaining by force or intimidation ties that should be fostered through mutual cooperation and respect. I agree completely with what you say about giving up on life and surrendering all hope if our country passed from the hands of one master into the hands of another without ever having been truly ours.
Posted by: M.A.T. at August 28, 2005 11:16 PM
