Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog

Hey you forgot Puerto Rico! U.S. Presidents since George H.W. Bush have left the statehood option to Puerto Ricans to decide. Periodic ballots on the issue. My guess is that they will finally decide yes despite various tax breaks once they see Cuba may be the next state. Some virulance to the antipathy between Cubans and Puerto Ricans. Both Hispanic but quite different cultures. By the way a little noticed fact is that remittances and back and forth travel, some illegal of course, between U.S. and Central Americans means down the road they might want to join up, especially after the forthcoming Mexican revolution and the northern states of Mexico petitioning for statehood or some special transition before that is accomplished. If Quebec were freed the rest of Canada would be ripe for statehood and then hey what a great thing for N.American, another French cultural center now that NOLA has been destroyed by Hurricane Katrina. By the way Gen. Sherman tried to talk Lincoln into taking over Cuba in the Lincoln Administration but Lincoln did not want to swallow that many Spanish speaking people as citizens. Remember Lincoln was defeated for Congress by his opposition to the Mexican War. And by the way more of Mexico would have become part of the U.S. except President Polk decided against it. Let's face it accomodation with the Hispanic world one way or another is the future of the U.S. Hate to say this but assimilation of Catholics may beat Europes problem of assimilating Muslims. For a quick update on territorial expansion read Robert Kagan's "Dangerous Nation" (unfortunate title since really the first of a triology on U.S. diplomatic history.) This book fills a real void.l

DC may be closer conceptually to Yucatan than Cuba. Yucatan (IIRC) applied for admission to the Union as the same time as Texas. While Texas was rapidly added, however, Yucatan was viewed as too little gain for too much effort.

While Cuba would present the US with obvious resources (Land and Labor), adding DC as a state would add nothing to the Union except empower various rentier classes resident in that city.

Maybe never to be, but the next State should be Israel, including the occupied territories. The trade would be the barring of any decades old property claims in return for universal citizenship, which includes the Bill of Rights under a one-person one-vote rule of law.

The status quo, with Israel having little self restrain and therefore no real peace, benefits no one and, if history is any guide, an invitation to a higher catastrophe.

The real prizes here are Pax Americana and, not inconsequently for the long term, two seats in the US Senate.

I think the latest in the Barnett line may well be around for Cuba's accession. Remember, up until a few years ago there was an active statehood party in the Philippines and in 1936 the Datus, Sultans and Imams of the Southern Philippines sent a declaration to Roosevelt asking that their part of the country not be given independence, but remain a protectorate (we had brought them a generation of peace, good government and growing prosperity). Here is something I wrote on Cuban statehood (http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010207A).