Scottish Bank Fined for Doing Business with Iran and Cuba

The  Royal Bank of Scotland is the latest on a long list of institutions fined for doing business with Iran and Cuba.
The Royal Bank of Scotland is the latest on a long list of institutions fined for doing business with Iran and Cuba.

HAVANA TIMES — The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) agreed to pay $100 million US dollars for violation of US sanctions on Iran, Sudan, Burma and Cuba.

In a statement issued RBS said it “deeply regrets” its violations of the sanctions and promised greater controls in the future.

The US Treasury Department is on an offensive against companies doing business with the above mentioned countries. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc., HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA), Standard Chartered Plc (STAN) and ING Bank NV are some of those forced to pay heavy fines in recent years.

“We remain resolute in enforcing our comprehensive sanctions against Iran, and we will continue to take aggressive action against those who would flout our law,” David Cohen, undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence told Bloomberg.

Cuba has long been on the black list that the US tries to enforce on third country’s companies.


22 thoughts on “Scottish Bank Fined for Doing Business with Iran and Cuba

  • December 23, 2013 at 8:44 am

    That’s one hell of a Potemkin village. I’ve spent probably close to a total of two years in Cuba since 1993, far from any “handlers” , with a Cuban wife to boot – and speak fluent Cubano, and I still haven’t seen the hellhole you describe as bein Cuba.

  • December 19, 2013 at 8:32 pm

    You have an amusingly inflated estimation of the significance of a handful of commenters on HT if you think the US government pays people like Moses to troll these pages pretending to be a black man married to a CUban woman.

    The reason most US travellers to Cuba return as apologists for the Castro dictatorships is because most of them are left-leaning to begin with (that’s why they decide to go to Cuba), and because most US tour groups are operated by highly motivated pro-Castro activists, minded by Cuban handlers from the Ministry of the interior. These tours amount to organized tours of a tropical Potemkin village.

    If Americans were permitted to travel independently, as I did, staying at casa particulars, eating at paladars, and hiring my own cab drivers and tour guides, they would see a much more accurate picture of Cuba as it really is.

  • December 19, 2013 at 6:54 pm

    This isn’t about US foreign policy, it is about US banking laws. If you want the benefit of banking access to the US market, you have to obey US laws. Cuba is free to do business with those banks that have no interest in doing business in the US. Obama relaxed those aspects of US policy that he was able to do by Executive Order without Congressional approval. Your more sinister rationale for these changes really is purely coincidental. The fact that the embargo has not instigated political reform does call into question the effectiveness of the strategy but it’s a reach to call the embargo “stupid”. Finally, while those who have hoped for “regime change” in Cuba truly have been longsuffering, Father Time is finally on our side. Real change is really, really “round the corner”.

  • December 19, 2013 at 1:19 pm

    Dan, you sound like my wife complaining about my time spent commenting on HT. Of course, I work for living. I have to because I support my extended family in Cuba. Please send my whatever links you have to government sponsors who would be interested in paying me to do this. Ojala! that I could get paid to straighten folks like you out about the Cuban reality.

  • December 19, 2013 at 9:16 am

    Griffen, I don’t “need” Moses to be a USAID paid commenter b/c he hates Cuba. Plenty of Americans (though few black ones) fall into that category out of sheer ignorance and indoctrination. It’s b/c of the amount of time he spends commenting. Are you unaware of these government sponsored astroturfers and journalists ? As far as your “brutal dictatorship” goes, you ought to keep in mind the slip by the head of the USINT about 10 or 15 years ago when he admitted that travel by US citizens to the island tended to make them oppose US policy when they return to the US. Most Cubans as well as visitors, that I know would never call the government brutal.

  • December 19, 2013 at 8:39 am

    I can’t see what there is to cheer about a Scottish bank being forced to follow US foreign policy. I’d like to comment on a few things though. I agree with you that genocide isn’t an appropriate term to use and it is inconsistent in its enforcement, but it is strange to use that as a justification for its existence. But let’s look at the various aspects – allowing of Cuba to purchase food and some medicines. This is a one way trade and was illegal anyway. Unlimited remittances – though right has the adverse effect that it creates wealth differences not based on merit and a culture of dependency. This seems to be intentional. Increased tourism – though a necessary evil, creates a culture of Jineterismo (metaphorically speaking). Again this seems intentional. None of these do much for a sustainable economy. What Cuba needs is to increase its agricultural and industrial production and lessen its dependence on imports. This requires investment and access to markets, both of which the embargo severely hampers. Again this seems intentional – severely cripple the economy, but leave some things go through that are only beneficial to the US or are likely to destabilise the country and also give the US a get out clause. And the most stupid thing is that the embargo though causing much economic hardship has not done anything to instigate political change (in fact has probably done the opposite). Finally, you are a bit like a Jehova’s Witness always saying that a regime collapse is round the corner. It is unproductive to base a policy on what may or may not happen in the future. All guesses are likely to be wrong. The issues need to be dealt with now.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *