[dragonwriter]

> Presidents Clinton and Bush both waived that part law

Part of the issue with Helms-Burton is that the retaliatory provisions include a private cause of action for any expatriates whose (former) property is impacted, so that it is impossible for the executive branch to control the application of the law.

> and Canada, Mexico, and the EU all don't recognize it.

Whether foreign countries recognize it has no impact on a anyone subject to it if they have assets that become subject to the jurisdiction of US courts.

> So I'm not sure it has had any real impact other than antagonizing US allies, and generating some private lawsuits.

Those private lawsuits are an additional risk, which is taken into account when firms decide whether or not to do business in or with Cuba -- and which are a negative factor in those decisions. Which illustrates how the embargo's impacts extend beyond just US-Cuba trade.

[NoPiece]

Yes, I agree there is private lawsuit risk, and noted it. I was responding to the parent saying "So no trade for Cuba, then." There is trade, there are some lawsuits, and the US Govt. policy is to ignore the law.

> Whether foreign countries recognize it has no impact on a anyone subject to it if they have assets that become subject to the jurisdiction of US courts.

I disagree, but regardless, the fear of private lawsuits hasn't kept large European, canadian, and Mexican companies from doing business and trading with Cuba.

http://www.cubatrade.org/nonus.html