With the Obama Administration's rapprochement toward Cuba, the voices of the right wing reactionaries are leading the chorus to continue the Cold War policies that have separated this Caribbean neighbor island from the United States since John F. Kennedy imposed the economic and political embargo in 1962.
February 7, 2014 marked the 52th anniversary of the ongoing US embargo against Cuba, an island nation 90 miles off the coast of Florida. The embargo, known among Cubans as "el bloqueo" or "the blockade," consists of economic sanctions against Cuba and restrictions on Cuban travel and commerce for all people and companies under U.S. jurisdiction.Although Obama's lifting is attempting to reestablish diplomatic relations with Cuba, the voices in the U.S. Congress led by the likes of Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and Mark Rubio (R.-Fla.), both of who have presidential aspirations and are the descendants of Cuban middle-class exiles who fled the island withe the success of the Cuban Revolution under Fidel Castro.
But, as Robert Griffith and Paula Baker state in Chapter 5 of their book "Major Problems in American History Since 1945," the roots of the U.S.-Cuba differences go much further back to the Dwight D. Eisenhower administration before Castro and his band of revolutionaries overthrew the Fulgencio Batista dictatorship, a dictator supported by the U.S.
"To comprehend the nature of the United States troubled relations with Cuba during the 1960s," they write, "requires an understanding of at least three separate but interrelated topics: the history of U.S. relations with Latin America, especially the Caribbean, the response of the United States to social revolutions both in Latin America and throughout the Third World; and the United States' Cold War struggle with the Soviet Union. The History of relations between the United States and Cuba serves in turn to highlight patterns that were common to postwar U.S. policy throughout the Third World, including Southeast Asia and the Middle East."
The U.S., the writers say, exercised a dominant influence in Latin America featuring armed interventions in Cuba, Colombia (Panama), the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Nicaragua and Mexico. Franklin D. Roosevelt forswore military action in 1933 but after WWII, the policy was "honored in the breach" as the U.S intervened directly or indirectly in Guatemala (under Eisenhower), Cuba (Kennedy), the Dominican Republic (Johnson), Chile (Nixon), Nicaragua (Reagan), Grenada (Reagan), Panama (Bush), and Haiti (Clinton). Seen in this light, Kennedy's intervention in Cuba was simply part and parcel of a deeply rooted historical pattern.
As social revolutions swept across Latin America, U.S. leaders feared that they would threaten U.S economic interests – property, investments, and markets – not to mention the strategic control of the region. When Castro overthrew the Batista regime in 1959, their worst fears were realized. Castro seized U.S. industries owned by U.S. investors and he rapidly rose in stature in the region as a popular symbol to resistance to the United States.
U.S. military and political strategists identified most revolutionary movements in Latin America and Asia with the foreign policies of the Soviet Union. Many of the Latin American revolutions were led by men and women who were socialists, if not communists. In part, this was because the Soviet Union supported such revolutions, and also because U.S. leaders seemed unable or unwilling to distinguish between indigenous social change and foreign subversion (outside agitators). A knee-jerk reaction to any type of change became the cardinal theme of the Cold War.
The 1954 overthrow of the democratically-elected reformist government in Guatemala was engineered by the United States. The government Jacobo Arbenz Guzman had been in power only 10 years following decades of dictatorship and had passed various reforms, including nationalization of lands belonging to the United Fruit Company. That, combined with (largely groundless) fears that the Soviets might establish a beachhead led the the Eisenhower administration to launch a CIA-led coup and install a right-wing, pro-U.S. dictatorship. That intervention served, in turn, as a model for the U.S. officials who planned the abortive 1961 Bay of Pigs landing in Cuba.
After Castro came into power, there was strong opposition to the new economic programs of the Cuban government in the U.S. government and fears that its success would become a Cold War victory for the Soviet Union. The failed attempt to overthrow the new Cuban government strongly reinforced U.S. opposition to Castro, which helped to propel him into an ever tighter embrace of the Soviet Union. This development, in turn, tempted the Soviets to introduce nuclear weapons into Cuba, setting the stage for the Cuban missile crisis.
In his address to the United Nations in 1960, Castro denounced the articles in the Cuban constitution that were inserted at U.S. insistence that the United States had the right to intervene in Cuban political affairs and to lease certain parts of the island fort naval basis or for their col deposits. In other words, the right to intervene and to lease naval bases was imposed by force by the legislative body of another country, since Cuban senators were clearly told that if they did not accept, the occupation forces would not be withdrawn.
"The first unfriendly act perpetrated by the government of the United States," Castro said, "was to throw open its doors to a gang of murderers, bloodthirsty criminals who had murdered hundreds of defenseless peasant, who had never tired of torturing prisoners for many, many years, who had killed right and left. Why was this unfriendly act on the part of the government of the United States toward Cuba? At the time Cuba could not understand, but now saw the reason clearly. The policy was (a Cold War) attitude of the United States."
And now, 52 years later, an aging Castro has survived 10 U.S. presidents and countless assassination attempts and has lived to see a thawing in the relationship between the two neighbors. Will the thaw continue, or will it be nipped in the bud by the incoming Republican Congress who might return relations to the Cold War status quo?
Estimates place the cost of the Cuban embargo to the US economy between $1.2 and $4.84 billion annually. A 2010 study by Texas A and M University calculated that 6,000 American jobs could be created by lifting the embargo.
There were an estimated total of 6,602 political detentions in Cuba in 2012, which is among the world's highest on a per capita basis.
The United Nations has denounced the US embargo against Cuba for 22 straight years. The vote against the embargo was 188-2 in 2013, with only Israel supporting the United States.
The United States began exporting food to Cuba following a devastating hurricane in 2001 and is now the island's second-largest food supplier. Annual food sales to Cuba peaked at $710 million in 2008.
The US policy on Cuban migration is known as "wet foot/dry foot" because if a Cuban is interdicted at sea ("wet foot"), she will be returned to Cuba, but if she manages to reach land ("dry foot"), she will be permitted to stay in the United States.
"To comprehend the nature of the United States troubled relations with Cuba during the 1960s," they write, "requires an understanding of at least three separate but interrelated topics: the history of U.S. relations with Latin America, especially the Caribbean, the response of the United States to social revolutions both in Latin America and throughout the Third World; and the United States' Cold War struggle with the Soviet Union. The History of relations between the United States and Cuba serves in turn to highlight patterns that were common to postwar U.S. policy throughout the Third World, including Southeast Asia and the Middle East."
The U.S., the writers say, exercised a dominant influence in Latin America featuring armed interventions in Cuba, Colombia (Panama), the Dominican Republic, Haiti, Nicaragua and Mexico. Franklin D. Roosevelt forswore military action in 1933 but after WWII, the policy was "honored in the breach" as the U.S intervened directly or indirectly in Guatemala (under Eisenhower), Cuba (Kennedy), the Dominican Republic (Johnson), Chile (Nixon), Nicaragua (Reagan), Grenada (Reagan), Panama (Bush), and Haiti (Clinton). Seen in this light, Kennedy's intervention in Cuba was simply part and parcel of a deeply rooted historical pattern.
As social revolutions swept across Latin America, U.S. leaders feared that they would threaten U.S economic interests – property, investments, and markets – not to mention the strategic control of the region. When Castro overthrew the Batista regime in 1959, their worst fears were realized. Castro seized U.S. industries owned by U.S. investors and he rapidly rose in stature in the region as a popular symbol to resistance to the United States.
U.S. military and political strategists identified most revolutionary movements in Latin America and Asia with the foreign policies of the Soviet Union. Many of the Latin American revolutions were led by men and women who were socialists, if not communists. In part, this was because the Soviet Union supported such revolutions, and also because U.S. leaders seemed unable or unwilling to distinguish between indigenous social change and foreign subversion (outside agitators). A knee-jerk reaction to any type of change became the cardinal theme of the Cold War.
The 1954 overthrow of the democratically-elected reformist government in Guatemala was engineered by the United States. The government Jacobo Arbenz Guzman had been in power only 10 years following decades of dictatorship and had passed various reforms, including nationalization of lands belonging to the United Fruit Company. That, combined with (largely groundless) fears that the Soviets might establish a beachhead led the the Eisenhower administration to launch a CIA-led coup and install a right-wing, pro-U.S. dictatorship. That intervention served, in turn, as a model for the U.S. officials who planned the abortive 1961 Bay of Pigs landing in Cuba.
After Castro came into power, there was strong opposition to the new economic programs of the Cuban government in the U.S. government and fears that its success would become a Cold War victory for the Soviet Union. The failed attempt to overthrow the new Cuban government strongly reinforced U.S. opposition to Castro, which helped to propel him into an ever tighter embrace of the Soviet Union. This development, in turn, tempted the Soviets to introduce nuclear weapons into Cuba, setting the stage for the Cuban missile crisis.In his address to the United Nations in 1960, Castro denounced the articles in the Cuban constitution that were inserted at U.S. insistence that the United States had the right to intervene in Cuban political affairs and to lease certain parts of the island fort naval basis or for their col deposits. In other words, the right to intervene and to lease naval bases was imposed by force by the legislative body of another country, since Cuban senators were clearly told that if they did not accept, the occupation forces would not be withdrawn.
"The first unfriendly act perpetrated by the government of the United States," Castro said, "was to throw open its doors to a gang of murderers, bloodthirsty criminals who had murdered hundreds of defenseless peasant, who had never tired of torturing prisoners for many, many years, who had killed right and left. Why was this unfriendly act on the part of the government of the United States toward Cuba? At the time Cuba could not understand, but now saw the reason clearly. The policy was (a Cold War) attitude of the United States."
And now, 52 years later, an aging Castro has survived 10 U.S. presidents and countless assassination attempts and has lived to see a thawing in the relationship between the two neighbors. Will the thaw continue, or will it be nipped in the bud by the incoming Republican Congress who might return relations to the Cold War status quo?
EMBARGO FACTS
President John F. Kennedy sent his press secretary to buy 1,200 Cuban cigars the night before he signed the embargo in Feb. 1962.Estimates place the cost of the Cuban embargo to the US economy between $1.2 and $4.84 billion annually. A 2010 study by Texas A and M University calculated that 6,000 American jobs could be created by lifting the embargo.
There were an estimated total of 6,602 political detentions in Cuba in 2012, which is among the world's highest on a per capita basis.
The United Nations has denounced the US embargo against Cuba for 22 straight years. The vote against the embargo was 188-2 in 2013, with only Israel supporting the United States.
The United States began exporting food to Cuba following a devastating hurricane in 2001 and is now the island's second-largest food supplier. Annual food sales to Cuba peaked at $710 million in 2008.
The US policy on Cuban migration is known as "wet foot/dry foot" because if a Cuban is interdicted at sea ("wet foot"), she will be returned to Cuba, but if she manages to reach land ("dry foot"), she will be permitted to stay in the United States.
(source: http://cuba-embargo.procon.org/)
2 comments:
Cruz is a Canadian,born and raised canuck from Alberta. Rubio's father was a bar tender in Las Vegas, hardly middle-class and he left Cuba years BEFORE Castro came to power. He was also a part-time Morman that some how got lost when the family moved back to Miami. These two, like most Chusma, are as phoney as a three dollar bill. Neither has been to Cuba, they don't have the guts. Cruz cannot even speak Spanish!
They are two gold plated opportunists looking for votes. Not a chance in hell that either one will ever be President. Hillary would wipe the floor with them.
Castro and his cronies are murderous, evil bastards. Mormon has two "O's" for the illiterate moron. English is the language of this country; Spanglish is not required in this country. Only in the Lone Star Card infested valley is it necessary. RGV, a cesspool of "gimme something for free cause I'm a stupid Mexican."
Post a Comment