PRESIDENT Clinton was in no win position. Sign the waiver to postpone the sanctions section in the Helms law and he loses the strong Cuban American vote in two key states, Florida and New Jersey.

Don't sign the waiver and he unretaliatory measures from EU and his closer trading partners Canada and Mexico. He also the strong displeasure of the business community which will be at the receiving end of the retaliation.

The President has come up with a compromise which buys time but does not affect the travel restrictions clause already in effect and causing strong reaction.

Yesterday he addressed another and postponed for six months the date on which US companies can sue foreign companies for compensation if they have invested in property in Cuba which was confiscated when Fidel Castro took over in 1959.

The influential business sector, the Administration for the most part and most of the media oppose the Helms Burton law. It is seen as an ill judged cocktail mixing Cuba and election politics and pandering to a lobby which demonises Dr Castro and is based on events of almost 40 years ago.

It is irritating to many Americans' to have an outdated Marxist state just off its shores which has survived a US economic blockade and is now getting a new lease of life through foreign investment.

But it is not seen as a major issue.

It is so seen, of course, by the Cuban exile community concentrated in Florida and New Jersey and for companies and individuals who have never been compensated for Dr Castro's nationalisation of their property. This is a valid point namely, that some foreign companies are profiting from "stolen" property.

The Helms Burton Bill co-sponsored by the redoubtable Senator Jesse Helms from North Carolina and Representative Dan Burton from Indiana both Republicans was calculated to turn the screws on both Castro and Clinton in an election year while there was still a Republican majority in the House and Senate to ensure its passage.

But the so called "extra territorial" measures which would allow non US companies and nationals to be penalised and sued in US courts rang alarm bells in the State Department which knew the kind of reaction to expect from "allies" in Nato and the EU.

In the Western hemisphere, President Clinton risked seeing his hard won North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada and Mexico put under huge strain. In addition, the President's plans for extending the pact to embrace Central and South America in a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) would also be jeopardised.

For all these reasons, President Clinton was ready to veto the Helms Burton Bill last February until two aircraft of the Cub an American organisation, Brothers to the Rescue, were shot down near the Cuban coast but outside territorial limits by MiG fighters, killing the two pilots and two passengers. The anti Castro feeling spurred Mr Clinton into signing the Bill, but he first got Congress to amend it to give him some flexibility in applying it.

It is this flexibility which is now at issue. But clarification is needed.

Firstly, the Helms Burton Act does not apply to ordinary trade with Cuba. It only can be invoked in cases where foreign companies have invested, usually through joint ventures, in property which was seized from US companies or citizens.

Secondly, Mr Clinton does not have flexibility over Title IV of the Act which is now in force, and under which senior executives of offending companies and their families can be banned from entering the US. The executives of the Canadian Sherritt mining company and their families have recently been "advised" they will be banned unless Sherritt withdraws from its involvement in a mine formerly owned by a US company.

Where President Clinton does have flexibility is under Title III, under which foreign companies accused of exploiting confiscated US property can be sued in US courts for compensation. This provision was to come into effect unless the President signed a waiver to postpone it for six months.

HE has ducked and weaved by allowing the measure to become law but has postponed for six months the date on which lawsuits can be filed against the offending foreign companies.

But regardless of what he has done about Title III, the EU, Canadians and others are ready to retaliate over the travel restrictions. This could mean a "blacklist" of US executives who would receive similar treatment from the EU.

There will also be a "watch list" of US companies filing under Article Ill whenever it does go into effect. According to the Wall Street Journal there, are only about 30 companies entitled to do so concerning property worth $1.1 billion out of the 6,000 companies which had property seized.

For the EU, President Clinton's compromise gives breathing space and it hopes that after November's US election there will be a permanent compromise.