A Relationship in Crisis
by
Brittyne Baggett
The island of Cuba has been a focal point of American foreign policy since the acquisition of Florida in the late 1800's. Cuba continues to capture America's attention as it is the only existing communist state in the Western Hemisphere. U.S. policy has attempted to topple the communist regime in Cuba since its outset in 1961. Policies designed to incite revolution, destroy the Cuban economy, and starve the Cuban people seem to be at odds with American ideals of democracy and sovereignty. It is, in fact, the very policies that the United States has implemented that have strengthened and prolonged Fidel Castro's reign in Cuba. The relationship between the United States and Cuba is paradoxical in that its very basis is anti-democratic. The United States never has supported the right of the Cuban people to govern themselves and now it has adopted a position of attempting to force on Cuba the political ideals it deems safe. This examination hopes to explain the background of that relationship and the state in which it now exists. Foreign policy in Cuba is fascinating in that it is a story unlike any other in U.S. history. The ability of one small island to dominate the foreign policy concerns of a world power is certainly an subject for inquiry.
This paper illustrates the application of two National Geographic
Standards.
Standard No. 13, the forces for cooperation and conflict that shape
the division of the earth's surface, is evident in this topic.
Standard No. 18, using geography to interpret the present and the
future,
is also reflected in this examination.
INTRODUCTION
Obsession with the island of Cuba itself is nothing new in the United
States. For the last thirty years, the small island just 92 miles
off the coast of Florida, has shaped American foreign policy.
Cuba's
geographical location and political structure place it at odds with the
United States on all fronts. The close proximity of Cuba to the
United
States coast places it in the limelight of national security
concerns.
The map provides a clear insight into why Cuban policy is so vital to
America.
Missiles set up in Cuba by the Soviet Union in 1962 could directly
target
the coast of Florida. This crisis escalated the importance of
Cuban
policy and created an awareness of its potential threat among the
American
public.
It is not only Cuba's strategic location that places it at odds with
the United States. Cuba's ideological communist base creates even
greater distance between the two nations politically. Since its
turn
to communism in the early 1960's, Cuba has frightened the American
public
and been at the heart of policy concerns. The defeat of communism
during the Cold War, has been an objective with the power override
rational
and logical policy measures. The threat of communism in Europe
drew
a response from Americans that led to an era of foreign policy unlike
that
of any other period. As that same threat spread into their own
hemisphere,
response to it became even more radical. Cuba became more than a
foreign policy concern as the public began to perceive it as a
legitimate
threat to life and the security of the nation. These fears were
proven
to be justified in wake of the Cuban Missile Crisis. Since those days
of
bomb shelters and predictions of nuclear war, Cuba has not been able to
shake its image as a time bomb on the verge of explosion. Cuba
has
been internalized as an enemy. This has led to a state of emotionalism
that overrides objectivity in policy making. The end of the Cold
War and the collapse of the Soviet Union has done little to change
American
perceptions about the threat of Cuba.
The longer the Communist regime in Cuba continues, the more reactionary
American policy towards the island nation becomes. The paradox of
this situation is that it is the response of American policy to Fidel
Castro's
regime that gives it its power. As Jorge Dominguez points out in
his article "The Secrets of Castro's Staying Power", "The Castro regime
endures in part because its enemies unwittingly help it to survive."
(1)
The role the United States has played in perpetuating Cuban communism
and
strengthening the power of Fidel is fascinating.
Roots of Current Sentiment:
The story of U.S. foreign policy in Cuba seems to follow a cyclical
pattern of increasing and decreasing tensions. Events that have
led
to a relaxation of the policies defining the relationship have been
quickly
followed by events that led to a tightening of those very
policies.
Foreign policy concerning Cuba has been troublesome for the United
States
since as early as 1819 when the acquisition Florida drew Cuba closer to
the U.S. border. The main goal of the U.S. at the time was to
prevent
Cuba from falling into the hands of the French or the English, both
powers
much stronger than itself. This fear led America to support the
Spanish
control of the island since they were much to weak to threaten the
United
States. It was an identical situation, born from fear of foreign
domination by another world leader, that resurfaced in the late
1950's.
As the United States sought to defend its global position in light of
the
increasing expansion of the Soviet Union, it was left with no option
but
to go on the offensive as Cuba aligned itself with the Soviet
Union.
This began a campaign against Cuba that has raged for three
decades.
As explained by Jeffrey Elliot in Nothing Can Stop the Course of
History,
"The United States has never been able to accept the existence of the
Cuban
Revolution or the establishment of a social system that is different
than
its own." (2) In an attempt to destroy Cuba's social system, the
United States has enacted policies, specifically the embargo, that are
designed to topple the Communist regime in Cuba and create on the
island
a miniature replica of itself. The conclusion of the Cold War
should
have signaled some changes in that policy; unfortunately, the policies
only grow increasingly strict. The main objectives of the embargo
have been met. Cuban troops are out of Africa, Cuba is no longer
supporting
any revolutionary movements, and its ties to the Soviet Union have been
severed. Rather than acknowledging the accomplishment of these
objectives,
the United States continues to actively seek the demise of Fidel
Castro.
Closer examination of these policies will bring to light that the
effects
of these policies subvert their original intentions. History of
U.S.
Policy The United States first enacted the controversial embargo on
February
3, 1961 after the nationalization of American-owned property and the
discovery
of Cuba's support of revolutionary movements. At this time the
Organization
of American States (OAS) agreed to the terms of the embargo. (3)
In 1975, the U.S. agreed to a compromise with the OAS allowing U.S.
subsidiaries
in Latin America to export to Cuba products with 20% or less U.S.
produced
content. In July of the same year, it was decided that member
states
would be allowed to follow their own policy with Cuba. Since this
decision, the United States has been virtually alone in its action
towards
Cuba. The embargo was relaxed even further during the Carter
administration
as the travel ban on the island was lifted. Soon after, the U.S.
returned to its strict policy of isolating the island as Castro sent
15,000
troops to Ethiopia (4), increased his involvement in Africa, and began
to support the revolutionaries in Central America. (5) Castro, in
taking a stand against the embargo, opened the borders of Cuba and
allowed
convicts and mental patients to leave the island. The incident,
known
as the Mariel Boatlift, put America on the defensive as the refugees
flooded
its borders. After bringing the crisis to a resolution and
returning
many to the island, President Reagan took measures to increase the
pressure
on the island and reinstituted the travel ban. The fall of the
Soviet
Union in the late 1980's created a crisis situation in Cuba. Cuba
lost its main trading partner, supplier, and link to the modernized
world.
The demise of communist countries abroad disrupted the ease of life
that
Cubans once enjoyed. They could no longer rely on others to plan
and stimulate their economy. Though this produced great hardships
on the island, the United States was optimistic that the new state of
affairs
would bring about the collapse of communism in Cuba as well.
Unfortunately,
the opposite was the case. Castro's retained power through the
crisis
and communism continued to prevail. As a result, the United
States
passed one of the most outalndish acts in foreign policy. The
Cuban
Democracy Act of 1992 was an attempt to punish Cuba for not enacting
democratic
reforms and for its human rights violations. The Act disallows
foreign
subsidiaries of U.S. businesses to conduct trade with Cuba. The Act
included
measures that should work to pressure Cuba to reform. The fate of
relations with Cuba are left in the hands of the President under the
Act.
The passage of time with no obvious move towards reform in Cuba led
legislators
to step up the legislative assault. Any loopholes that may have
existed
in the Cuban Democracy Act were effectively dismissed in July of 1995
with
the passage of the Helms-Burton legislation. The Helms-Burton Act is
formally
titled the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act
(LIBERTAD).
This Act tightens sanctions against the island, while attempting to
entice
the island with promises of U.S. support should a new leadership be
implemented
on the island. In a general sense, the tone of the legislation is
quite reaffirming. Cuba makes changes in order to be
rewarded.
These more positive objectives are outweighed by the restrictions
placed
on foreign investment on the island. The new law restricts exile
groups who are attempting to undermine Castro and places the power to
lift
the sanctions in the hands of a Congress that has more to lose by
changing
the policy than it has to gain. This stricter legislation came in
response to the attack on the Brothers to the Rescue planes that flew
into
Havana dropping pamphlets encouraging revolt against Castro. The
mission, ran by activist exile groups, resulted in the death of the
pilots.
Rather than encouraging revolt, the ultimate outcome of the mission was
to tighten U.S. laws against Cuba and increase a crackdown of
dissidents
and advocates of political liberalization in Cuba. The best
explanation
of United States policy against Cuba appears in a report that was
submitted
by Cuba to the secretary-general of the United Nations. It reads:
The continuing aggressive measures against Cuba by the United States
and
its escalation of those measures in recent years are designed to
produce
a 'whirlpool' effect in the economy, to ruin it by gradually cutting
off
its resources. According to calculations made by advocates of
this
policy, it would cause such a serious deterioration in the standards of
living of the population that spontaneous public demonstrations of
popular
discontent would occur, bringing to an end the social revolutionary
process
begun 36 years ago, and thereby fulfilling the main objective of the
foreign
policy towards Cuba of the last nine United States administrations. (6)
As is obvious, Cuba perfectly understands the intentions of the policies aimed at her by the United States. These policies, all desperate attempts to safeguard the U.S. from whatever threat the island may be, have become the most controversial and debated topics in U.S. foreign policy. Effects of Current U.S. Policy The interest in current policy stems from its ineffectiveness. Castro is still in power and the economic situation in Cuba seems to be improving in spite of the embargo against it. It has become obvious that the approach the U.S. has taken towards Cuba is ineffective. Despite all the data that exists to support this conclusion, lawmakers continue to support measures that strengthen Castro and prop up his regime. It is only in understanding the ways in which current policy perpetuates the situation in Cuba, that U.S. lawmakers can hope to formulate a more effective and respectable policy towards the island. Perpetuates Nationalism The most obvious flaw in current policy is that it gives Castro the leverage he needs to consolidate his support. Anti-American sentiment continues to unite Cubans against the United States, just as it has since the Spanish-American War. Though the United States claimed to be fighting for the freedom of Cuba, it took control of the situation and eliminated Cuba's role in the conflict. As it noted by the name of the war, Cuba was not even considered a vital part despite the fact that the war was being fought on its behalf. The memory of this usurpation of authority lingers in Cuba, not only in thought, but in the physical reminder of the war found at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. The base is on the eastern tip of the island. The fact that Americans occupy Cuban soil is a thorn in the flesh. This thorn is felt more accutely each time the United States attempts to assert itself over Cuban affairs in ways such as the embargo and the activity of the exiles. An article from U.S. News and World Report reports that, "Washington's unremitting hostility is shoring up Castro's 33-year long Communist reign by stirring nationalist passions and providing Castro with a handy reason to squash dissent...U.S. pressure does make it easier for Fidel to paint a picture of predatory U.S. behavior." (7) That picture is not a difficult one to paint. The fact that an external power is attempting to decide its fate is enough to convince the people of Cuba that the present regime is not too much to bear. There is no better illustration of this point than the Bay of Pigs invasion. The invasion that was formulated and backed by the CIA in an attempt to incite a revolt on the island. The mission failed because nationals did no come to its support. This incident makes two important points. First, it certainly paints the picture of the United States as a predator, interested in its objectives alone. The United States did and does not want Cuba to be communist. Therefore, it attempted to impose its desire for the Cuban government on Cuba by force regardless of the wishes of Cuban citizens. Secondly, as was clearly shown by the absence of Cuban national support, the Cuban people were not interested in overthrowing the regime. (8) Castro explains the situation well.
The United States wants to liberate Cuba from Communism, but in reality Cuba doesn't want to be liberated from Communism. In order to 'liberate' Cuba from Communism, the United States organized followers of Batista, the most reactionary people of this country, trained them, and armed them to come and liberate Cuba... For what purpose did the United States come to 'liberate' Cuba? To re-establish the power of the landholders, of the managers of its monopolistic businesses, of thieves, of torturers? In what sense can this be called liberty? (9)
It is precisely this type of sentiment that demonstrates how Castro was and is able to use acts of American aggression against Cuba to reinforce a sense of Cuban nationalism. It is in the failures of American policy that Castro find his power. He was able to play off the Bay of Pigs to give the Revolution legitimacy. His political skill was demonstrated when he manipulated the situation for his own advantages. He is quoted as saying in a radio announcement on April 16 that, "The invaders have been annihilated. The Revolution has emerged victorious. It destroyed in less than seventy two hours the army organized by the imperialist United States." (10) This came at a perfect time as he was facing shortages and economic hardships that could have undermined faith in the Revolution. The actions of the U.S., however, allowed him to restore the faith of the people and preserve his power during those days of economic difficulty.
Creates Domestic Problems The embargo further allows Castro to play on the anti-American sentiment and build on the spirit of nationalism by casting the United States as a scapegoat for the problems his island faces. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba has faced severe economic problems. The shortages of food, medicine, electricity, and oil have created a new state of poverty for the island. U.S. officials were convinced that the poverty the people faced would be the catalyst for the overthrow of the regime. (11) However, the failures of the communist system to address these problems over overshadowed by the blame placed for them on the United States. As long as Castro attribute these problems to the United States, they are not likely to promote opposition. The shortages of food that the island is experiencing can be seen as a direct result of the embargo, and, therefore, can not be used to undermine faith in Castro or his Communist position. The Cuban Democracy Act creates many problems for the island, most of which Castro has managed to turn for his benefit. For instance, the shortages of food and medicine on the island can be easily traced to the embargo. This allows Castro to avoid the other catalyst of poor central planning and decreasing sugar prices. The Act discontinues the 90% of U.S. subsidiary trade that was in food and medicines. (12) Though supporters point to the fact that medicines can be technically be sold on the island, the red tape surrounding the process makes it virtually impossible. The law states that medicines can be sold only if there is on-site inspections to verify the purposes for which the medicines are used. To be more precise, foreign distributors would have to track the distribution of medicine-hardly a cost effective or timely procedure. (13) In the same vein, food stuffs are allowed to enter the island in the form of humanitarian shipments from churches and organizations. While it is true that around $33 million worth of food was shipped to the island, this is hardly significant in light of the $500 million that was previously bought from the U.S. subsidiaries. (14) As Castro points to these as the reasons for the hardship of the people, he bolsters his support and diminishes the failures of his own system. It appears then that these laws actually benefit Castro. In light of the problems that the United States has created for the island, the successes of the Revolution look even better. As Don Schulz explains, "He (Castro) has been highly successful in employing the specter of the "Yankee threat" for his own political purposes. That specter-whether in the form of a US invasion, sabotage, embargo, hostile rhetoric, or a revanchist Cuban exile community...has been one of the keys to the dictators longevity. By manipulating the fears that these images evoke, Fidel has been able to wrap himself in the cloak of besieged nationalism and pose as the defender of the Cuban people and the Revolution." (15) As long as the U.S. is seen as the perpetrator of Cuba's woes, Castro is going to be able to rely on jingoistic appeals and avoid being held to any degree of responsibility.
Fails To Promote Internal Reform Not only does current legislation fail to detract from Castro's base support, it also fails to promote internal reform. If revolution is going to be imported from the United States, there will never be a need for Cuban nationals to risk their lives in opposing the status quo. The reforms that external forces are attempting to bring about rob Cuban nationals of initiative to instigate internal reform. Ironically, the actions of the Cuban exile groups working to promote democracy in Cuba are achieving very contrary results. Don Schulz continues his analysis when he says,
"News that the exiles are making military preparations and are drawing up constitutions and economic recovery programs for a post-Castro Cuba suggests that the solution to the Cuban problem will come from abroad; moreover, that there will be little role for those Cubans still in Cuba. Not only do these predictions mislead the masses about the probable course of events, but they relieve them from the responsibility for dealing with their own problems. If Castro is going to be toppled by external forces, there is no incentive for 'Cuban Cubans' to take the initiative and risk their lives." (16) It is well known that the Cuban Democracy Act came about due to the efforts of these right-wing exile groups. The pressures that the lobby group applied during the 1992 and the 1996 elections won them key legislative support. Campaign funds provided by the Cuban American National Foundation, totaling more than $120,000 dollars, were well received by Senator Robert Torricelli, the sponsor of the Cuban Democracy Act. (17 ) The Foundation solidified its support by persuading President Bush to shift his position in the 1992 election year and sign the bill into law. The significance of winning the support of the exile groups is evidenced in recent elections. President Clinton detracted from his usual evasive position and espoused a hardline approach to Cuba as he began his campaign in Florida where the Cuban exile groups reside. (18) To the Cuban, the actions of the exile groups are not seen as sincere or beneficial, but rather as a path by which members of the ancient totalitarian regime are gaining a foothold on the island. This simple fact works to build further support for Castro because, though the present situation may not be ideal, it is much more favorable than a return to the past. Until the people of Cuba are prepared to revolt and reform Castro's regime, any change in the system is unlikely. This action will not come about until the fate of Cuba is removed from the hands of outside influence and given back to the Cubans.
CONCLUSIONS:
U.S. foreign policy towards Cuba is unlike that directed at any other nation. It is built on selfish desires for supremacy and unjustified fear. Cuba no longer remains a threat to the United States. It has surrendered its weapons and is now struggling to become an economically independent nation. The rest of the international community is supporting Cuba in its transition. In light of this, the United States has isolated itself from the community with its own policies. Legislation such as Helms-Burton has been condemned by the United Nations and all its member states as being in violation of international law as it infringes on the sovereignty of allied nations to trade with whom and how they choose. (19) If the United States hope to enter into the new century as a leader in the international market and retain its image as a promoter of democracy, it must reformulate its approach to Cuba. Cuba would be beneficial to the U.S. as a trading partner and as an ally in the Western Hemisphere. In order for it to become such, the United States must begin to promote a democratic transition on the island and reverse the policies that wreak havoc on the Cubans.
FOOTNOTES:
1. Was a copyright map that could not be included.
2. Elliot, Jeffrey, Nothing Can Stop The Course Of History,
(New York, 1986), 186.
3. Leyva de Varona, Adolofo, "Propaganda and Reality: A Look
At The U.S. Embargo Against Castro's Cuba," a publication of the Cuban
American National Foundation, 1996,
4. Ratliff, William, "Follow the Leader in the Horn," published
by the Cuban American National Foundation, 1986.
5. "Cuba's Renewed Support for Violence in Latin America,"
published
by the Department of State (Washington D.C.), 1981.
5. "Necessity of Ending the Economic, Commercial, and Financial
Embargo Imposed By the United States Of America Against Cuba", Report
of
the Secretary-General of the United Nations, fiftieth session 1995.
6. Robinson, Linda, "Can The Revolution Survive?",
U.S.
News And World Report, (June 1992), 41.
7. Draper, Theodore. Castro's Revolution.
(New York, 1962), 91-103.
8. Lockwood, 218.
9. Matthews, 206.
10. Dominguez, 101.
11. Smith, "Our Cuban Diplomacy", 7.
12. Smith,10.
13. Smith,11.
14. Schulz, Don, "The United States and Cuba: From A
Strategy
of Conflict to Constructive Engagement", Journal of Interamerican
Studies
and World Affairs, vol.35 (1993), 82.
15. Ibid., 83.
16. Gedda, George, "Study Shows Power of Cuban Group", AP Press,
23 January 1997.
17. Smith, 3.
18. Report to the United Nations.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Batista, Fulgencio. The Growth and Decline of the Cuban Republic. New York: Devin-Adair, 1964.
Beals, Carleton. The Crime of Cuba. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1933.
Bernell, David. "The Curious Case of Cuba." Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs, vol.36 no.2 (Summer 1994), 65-101.
Casuso, Teresa. Cuba and Castro. New York: Random House, 1961.
Chapman, Charles Edward. A History of the Cuban Republic; a study in Hispanic american politics. New York: Macmillan, 1927.
Clinton, Bill. Statement by the President on the Helms-Burton Act. released by the White House. 16 July 1996. Online. http://www.us.net/cip/07hb02.htm.
Draper, Theodore. Castro's Revolution. New York: Praeger, 1946.
Dominguez, Jorge. "The Secrets of Castro's Staying Power." Foreign Affairs. 72 (Spring 1993). 97-107.
Dominguez, Jorge. To Make the World Safe for Revolution: Cuba's Foreign Policy. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1989.
Elliot, Jeffrey. Nothing Can Stop the Course of History. New York: Harper,1986.
Farah, Douglas. "Cuba Signs Broad Pact With Canada." The Washington Post. 23 January 1997, A10.
Farber, Samuel. "The Cuban Communist in the Early Stages of the Cuban Revolution: Revolutionaries or Reformists?" Latin American Research Review . Vol. 18. (1983) 59-83.
Foner, Philip. The Spanish Cuban American War and the Birth of American Imperialism. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1972.
Fontaine, Roger. On Negotiating with Cuba. Washington: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1975.
Gedda, George. Study Shows Power Of Cuban Group. AP Press. 23 January 1997.
Gonzalez, Edward. Cuba Under Castro. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1974.
Halperin, Maurice. The Rise and Decline of Fidel Castro. Berkley: UP 1972.
Healy, David. The United States in Cuba, 1898-1902. Madison: Unversity of Wisconsin Press, 1963.
Huberman, Leo. Cuba: Anatomy of a Revolution. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1960.
Lazo, Mario. Dagger in the Heart; American Policy Failures in Cuba. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1968.
Leyva de Varona, Adolofo. Propaganda and Reality: A
Look
at the Embargo Against Cuba. Published by the Cuban American
National Foundation. updated version 1996.
Online. http.//www.canfnet.org/canf-lib/embg_eng.txt.
Lockwood, Lee. Castro's Cuba, Cuba's Fidel. New York: Vintage Books, 1969.
Neccesity of Ending the Economic, Commercial, and Financial Embargo Imposed by the United States of America Against Cuba. Report of the Secretary General of the United Nations. 20 September 1995.
MacGaffey, Wyatt. Twentieth Century Cuba: t he Background of the Castro Revolution. New York: Anchor Books, 1965.
Manach, Jorge. Marti: Apostle of Freedom. New York: Devin-Adair, 1950.
Matthews, Herbert. The Cuban Story. New York: Harcourt, 1961.
Matthews, Herbert. Fidel Castro. New York: Harcourt, 1969.
Matthews, Herbert. The Fruits of Fascism. New York: Harcourt, 1943.
Mills, C. Wright. Listen, Yankee. New York: Ballantine Books, 1961.
Myers, Steven. "Clinton Clears Media to Open in Cuba." New York Times, 13 February 1997. A6.
Oppenheimer, Albert. Castro's Final Hour. New York: Macmillan, 1992.
Oppenheimer, Albert. "Incresingly, Castro Loses Touch With Cuba." The Miami Herald. 28 July 1992, A12.
Phillips, Ruby. The Cuban Dilema. New York
Created 5-7-97
Return to http://ejw.i8.com/97/plans97.htm