Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China Beats US In Early Cuban Internet Infrastructure Investment

Posted by timothy on from the who-is-this-us-you-speak-of? dept.

lpress writes: The US would like to sell Cuba Internet service and equipment, but we have had little success so far. China has won the first round — they financed and installed Cuba's undersea cable, supplied backbone equipment and public WiFi access centers and will provide equipment for the forthcoming home DSL rollout. That being said, Cuba has very little connectivity today and most of what they have and plan to install is already obsolete by today's standards, so they will be buying a lot of equipment in the future.

16 of 109 comments (clear)

  1. O Rly? by Andreas+Mayer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So you hold an embargo against a nation for decades and now they don't fall over themselves to buy from you?

    What an ungrateful bunch!

    1. Re:O Rly? by hij · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meh, if they had purchased it from the US the actual equipment would have been made in China anyway. The only difference is which set of suits gets to skim the profits off the back of which Chinese workers.

      --
      Believe nothing -- Buddha
    2. Re:O Rly? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > They (the "supporting" communist countries) abandoned that shithole and let it rot for many years.

      For decades, the Soviet Union in particular kept their economy afloat. They were an absolutely critical Atlantic Ocean seaport for the Soviet navy, a treasured vacation for Communist Party leadership, and and a critical source of sugar and tobacco luxury goods in an increasingly desperate Soviet economy. They were also an invaluable electronic listening post, an embarrassing counter-example to American and western democracy's political claims against communism, and a critical exporter of communist ideology to all of Latin America.

      Then they Soviet Empire went bankrupt, and the economy tanked. But they've still managed to avoid the boom-bust and destructive mismanagement of Haiti, and the third class US protectorate status of Puerto Rico, and they've managed to survive the devastation to their most critical trade good, tobacco, as worldwide smoking habits shifted. They still have one of the highest literacy rates in the world and lowest lower infant mortality rates, both notably better than the USA or Canada. They're making do with an economy that is stretched very, very thin, but give credit where it's due. They've avoided the murderous puppet governments of other desperate Caribbean islands such as Haiti and Jamaica.

    3. Re: O Rly? by hackwrench · · Score: 2

      I don't know much about the economy of Haiti and to be honest of Cuba either, but from what I have heard, avoiding a boom bust cycle by never having a boom does not seem like that great of an achievement.

    4. Re:O Rly? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > I really can't argue anything else in your post, but I can't help but wonder how Cuba was supposed to be an embarrassment vis a vis political systems.

      There's a lot of sources of embarrassment, from the ineffectiveness of the US embargo in collapsing their economy, to the demonstrably stable Communist regime, in the USA's back yard, one that countered the claims that the only way for Latin American nations to survive was as as US puppets, to Castro's ongoing political friendships with other Latin American countries. The living counterexample to claims of Communist enforced starvation and economic despair.

      Do understand that they're quite poor, but for most of them it's still much better than it was under Batista when stunning corruption, death gangs, and US organized crime controlled the island. The revolution there was inevitable: it's amazing that it worked so well, and that they have any economy left after 50 years of murderous anger from the nearest superpower.

    5. Re:O Rly? by dj245 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      an embarrassing counter-example to American and western democracy's political claims against communism

      I really can't argue anything else in your post, but I can't help but wonder how Cuba was supposed to be an embarrassment vis a vis political systems. Sure, it's easy to make the point that "America can't dislodge this thorn in their side that sits less than 200km from their own shore" but I'm hard pressed to come up with any positive connotations to "our dictatorship is better than your democracy."

      There are many positive impacts of being in a society that is not focused on capitalism. I have not been to Cuba, but in a general sense:

      1. Most communist countries have more public recreation space. Parks, squares, plazas, etc. are often more numerous and larger because the allocation of land is usually not based on "profit".

      2. In communist countries, citizens only have 1 entity to worry about spying on them, collecting personal information, and controlling their life. Cubans worry about the government. Americans worry about the government, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc etc.

      3. Culture and the arts often have a higher importance and more public funding. In most capitalist countries, art and culture has to pay for itself, or have the potential to pay for itself, or it doesn't get made. Many communist countries dedicate funding to this. Is it often self-serving? Sure. But art and culture have important roles in society and is often overlooked in capitalist countries.

      4. Stronger, smarter, and more comprehensive city planning (not sure if Cuba does this well or not). In capitalist countries, city planning seems to be a lot more organic and chaotic compared to communist ones. Companies and people build where they want to build, and are motivated by cost. This can have serious problems with regards to "tragedy of the commons" where everyone is looking out only for themselves and the entire population suffers as a result. Many communist countries do a better job managing this and make choices that are better for society as a whole. Cities are often more dense, inefficient suburbs are frowned upon, things are built where they are needed and not where it is cheapest to do so, etc. See also point #1.

      There are probably a lot more but this is just a few I could think of.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    6. Re:O Rly? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2

      You're pretty far off as far as Cuba is concerned. Last time I was in Cuba was 17 years ago (through Canada). I don't think a lot has changed....

      - Maybe lots of public spaces, hard to know. Not much commerce going on so lots of empty spaces in cities with people hanging around. If that's your idea of Parks and Recreation, fine. Seemed pretty dull and depressing unless you were looking for an underaged prostitute.
      - Yeah, you only have one oppressor, Fidel & Company. But you don't have any functional legal protections. None whatsoever. The party says you're toast and you are indeed toast (if there was any toast around). Actually, the one oppressor rule wasn't quite correct. There is a thriving black market and those sorts of things are not run by idealistic people. I will leave you to figure out the details. It's not hard.
      - Culture? Depends on your definition, I suppose. What I saw was mostly a wide varieties of different folk cultures. Interesting, but probably cost a couple of thousand dollars across the entire island.
      - City planning? Without much money, the only planning you get is what was there before the economy tanked and the relentless creativeness of humans. The only central planning that sort of worked was with agriculture and that carried a high price (not everybody likes to be forced into farming). Castro's planning failures are legion.

      Yes, you can argue that Cuba hasn't devolved into the horrid mess that is Haiti and the slow motion train wreck that is Puerto Rico and to a large extent the Castro's are responsible for that. But we all know that dictatorship is probably the most efficient of human political arrangements. It just lacks a few things.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  2. Communism or Capitalism by Roodvlees · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They probably agree on communistic principles. But currently China is more competitive than the USA, since that market is divided in monopolies by bought politicians.

    --
    Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
  3. China learned the foreign aid lesson from the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In the Cold War era (and still applies now), the US gave a lot of "Foreign Aid" money to many countries around the world. "Foreign Aid" in quotes because, often, the money just went the pocket of corrupt government officials, and the people in the country got what's left, if any. The result is a lot of money spent, a lot of corrupt officials made rich but very little goodwill generated among the common people.

    China obviously did their homework. Instead of just giving out money, they are building visible infrastructure projects around the less-developed countries in world, either as foreign aid if the host country accepts, or by "bidding" for infrastructure projects. "Bidding" in quotes because when you don't even try to make a profit and bundle in free financing package to boot, others can't really compete with you at all. Then the common people will see Chinese companies and workers building infrastructure for their benefit, generating goodwill.

    I wouldn't be surprised to learn the details of this successful "bid" may include 100% financing by China, probably at low interest, so Cuba don't have to pay a dime upfront. The money used for this would be a much better investment for China than buying US Bonds.

  4. Re:Obama loses even when he wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So it is Pres. Obama's fault that it is not any easier to do business in Cuba? Who was it again that turned Cuba into a testosterone test of who can be meaner and thus a bigger "man?" I seem to recall it was a different party who was howling at any mention of doing any sort of business with Cuba. Now it is Obama's fault that the US cannot sell anything to Cuba. Right.

  5. knock down the fanatics. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't read too much into anything. Your ability to understand the macroscopic relationships at play in the global community will only lead you to new world order conspiracies or other false beliefs. You do not know the motivations or facts in relation to this situation unless you personally possess documents or have held discussions.

    What I personally do know is that my life is going well, but investments are all down despite a relatively diversified portfolio, in times where the position of western nations is questioned, yet the situation is blamed on the Chinese economy.

    What I also know is that of the countries that actually supply data, every single country is in debt, to the cost of at least $20,000 per person on earth. To who? That is the difficult question when you begin the research. Webs of shell companies controlled by usurers skim money from the little man, yet there is no publicly listed way of figuring out how to earn from the foolishry of the people and their governments. You must be part of the in crowd. The billionaires, who in times of recession grow their earnings thousandfold.

    Cuba should do everything they can to keep the fangs of the usurers at bay.

    By the way, I know nothing and I'm drunks.

  6. What will be funny... by Drakonblayde · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is when the average Cuban has better bandwidth than the average US Citizen because they actually decided to build infrastructure

    1. Re:What will be funny... by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 2

      Yeah! We're number 16! We're number 16!

      American exceptionalism for the "win"...

      --
      That is all.
    2. Re:What will be funny... by dave420 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If size is the problem, then why aren't US cities the best in the world for internet access? They have lots of money, many subscribers, and manageable amounts of space.

      Stop making excuses for the chain cluster-fuck that is US internet infrastructure. The more you keep hand-waiving it away the longer it will exist.

  7. Re:Fuck China by Flavianoep · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yey! Lots of sex for China!

    --
    Linux is for people who don't mind RTFM.
  8. Re:Obama loses even when he wins by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, check again, the first of the embargo's against Cuba were instituted under Eisenhower so you are literally incorrect there, and the Helms–Burton Act was named after Jesse Helms and Dan Burton for a reason. It did pass with enough of a margin that Clinton's veto might have been overridden, and I doubt he saw it as important enough to push the issue. It certainly wasn't a policy drive of his, and he did make use of the waiver provisions.

    And a few years later, the Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act was instituted as well, though still under Clinton.

    But no, do keep up with the mindless mindless mindless mindless blaming everything, everything, everything, everything, on Democrats.