Over half a century, Cuba and the United States have not had diplomatic relations. Digging into the huge pile of bibliography about the rationale of the long-standing disagreement between these two neighbors can be strenuous.In order to go deeper into the topic, we recommend the following books:
Voices from the Other Side. An Oral History of Terrorism against Cuba, by Keith Bolender, published in 2010 in New York by Pluto Press; Cuba in the American Imagination. Metaphor and the Imperial Ethos, by Louis A. Pérez Jr., published in 2008 in Chapel Hill by The University of North Carolina Press, and Superpower Principles, edited by Salim Lamrani and published in 2005 in Monroe, Maine by Common Courage Press. This last book is a compilation of works by Howard Zinn, William Blum, Michael Parenti, and Noam Chomsky, among others.
Studying this extensive bibliography is necessary, especially considering the oversimplification and distortion of this topic in the dominant media. However, a shortcut can be taken into a question: are the differences insurmountable? What prevents our nations from overcoming them?
The United States also has strong disagreements with China, Russia, and some Latin American countries, but the relationship with them is relatively normal.
Year in, year out, most members of the United Nations ask the United States to lift the blockade (the most recent vote 188 to 2). Against the international consensus, the U.S. government refuses to end this aggression, mechanically arguing that it is just an “embargo.” This word has been historically aimed at making people believe that it is all about a bilateral issue. The books referred to above debunk this pretense thoroughly. Two recent events are worth noting so as to prove that it is not a problem that involves just the US and Cuba: (1) the fine of nearly nine billion dollars the French bank BNP Paribas was forced to pay as punishment for carrying out financial transactions with Cuba, and (2) the fact that Cuban baseball players cannot take part in the Mexican Baseball League because this organization has close ties with the US Major Leagues.
Recently, quite a few influential US figures have called for a change, including Hillary Clinton[1]. According to polls conducted by Atlantic Council, over fifty percent of US people favor a policy change concerning Cuba; over sixty percent in Florida. US entrepreneurs including the President of Google Eric Schmidt and the President of the US Chamber of Commerce Thomas Donohue have visited Cuba and advocate a policy change. The analysis of these figures’ discourse reveals that they see profit opportunities in a society holding high levels of education and, ultimately, they hope to shift Cuba away from socialism. There have been two historical trends in the US concerning Cuba: the hard line and the “smart power,” including a wide variety of nuances and combinations of both.
The hardliners have caused suffering and high costs to the Cuban people through sabotage; assassination attempts; military threats (the situation leading to the Missile Crisis, for instance) or invasions (“Bay of Pigs”); biological warfare; continuous economic, financial and media attacks, among others. The costs have been both direct and indirect, the latter being less evident sometimes but not less negative. For instance, being a country with limited resources, Cuba has been forced to focus much attention on armaments, military training, and counterintelligence operations. Besides, the island has been compelled to adapt its social dynamics to a besieged-castle situation, turning national security into a top priority, at the unavoidable expense sometimes of the deployment of all the socialist potential.
And yet, Cuba has survived and made significant social progress. Therefore, one may wonder what Cuba could do if the blockade were lifted. Nevertheless, the advocates of the “smart power” seem to believe that lifting the blockade would have the opposite effect: the collapse of the socialist system. Their expectation is that the contact with the “virtues” of capitalism would inevitably bring a change. They underestimate the Cuban people and are ignorant of the deep transformation undergone by the Cuban society since 1959.
Undoubtedly, the island faces some economic problems caused by various factors. Objective analyses of the economic problems in Cuba indicate that they result from a combination of reasons ranging from the US blockade to internal management and organizational mistakes as well as international crises, including the collapse of the socialist bloc in Eastern Europe, upon which the Cuban economy depended to a great extent. The Cuban Magazine Temas, no.62-63, April-September 2010 offers thorough analyses of this matter. Salim Lamrani’s works on Cuba can also be a great help in understanding such complex phenomena. In our view, being in a Third World country, with scarce natural resources, poses a huge problem in the first place. If, on top of that, the global superpower imposes all-out economic and financial restrictions, then the odds are not good. But the strengths of the system have always gained the upper hand over the adversities, which makes us wonder once more what Cuba could achieve if one of the main obstacles (the blockade) were removed.
Neither the hardliners nor the advocates of undermining Cuba by getting close to it understand that the island will not fall. By falling we mean changing the political system our nation has chosen. Any change in Cuba only concerns the Cubans, as well as any change in the US only concerns the US people. Today, despite the economic problems referred to before, Cuba is stronger than ever. The implementation of large-scale socio-economic guidelines is underway to overhaul the economy, including more opportunities for small private businesses, cooperatives, and foreign investments. There are already over 400,000 self-employed people on the island and counting.The development of tourism is steady. According to the website Cubadebate[2], in 2013, the Caribbean nation was visited by 2,852,572 tourists, who spent over a billion 800 thousand C.U.Cs in lodging and food. (The Cuban hard currency or C.U.C is worth about 10 percent more than the US dollar). This sector has been growing five percent lately, as published by Cubadebate.
On the island,everyone is provided education and healthcare (with an emphasis on health). Cuba is highly respected and loved all over Latin America and the world. It has respectful relations with most countries. Recently, both the President of Russia and that of China included Cuba on their tours around Latin America. Cuba participates in and even presides over many international events. In May, Cuba presided over the 67th Session of the World Health Assembly (WHA). Dr. Margaret Chan, the Director-General of the World Health Organization visited Cuba, where she praised the hard work of the island in this field. Cuba plays important roles in regional and world organizations.The Caribbean nation was the President Pro-tempore of CELAC (acronym in Spanish meaning Community of Latin American and Caribbean States). Cuba is also the seat of the peace talks between the Colombian government and rebel groups that fight in the only armed conflict that exists in the Western Hemisphere nowadays.
Cuban doctors cure thousands of people in dozens of nations around the globe: Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, and Haiti, just to mention a few, constantly show their gratitude for the invaluable medical aid provided by Cuba. During the 67th Session of the WHA (mentioned above), Roberto Morales, the Cuban Minister of Public Health pointed out that, over half a century, the Cuban medical assistance has reached 120 countries across the world, totaling 135,000 health workers that have provided their expertise. Today, fifty thousand Cuban health professionals work in 65 nations; twenty five thousand of them are doctors. The Cuban aid in this field also includes international projects, like Missión Milagro (Miracle Mission) together with Venezuela. Over the last ten years, about 3.4 million poor people with different eye disorders from all over Latin America have received eye operations and they have recovered their vision. 165 Cuban institutions take part in this mission[3].
In May, 2012, Elías Carranza, Director of United Nations “Latin American Institute for the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders,” during an international conference on law and justice, held in Havana, asserted that Cuba is the safest nation in the Latin American region[4].Also in May, 2012, the NGO Save the Children declared that Cuba is the Latin American country that holds the best conditions for motherhood.
Furthermore, the Cuban culture flourishes and its artists and musicians are successful.Sports are strong on the island. There is peace all along the nation and our happiness is contagious even in the difficult circumstances we have to face sometimes. We have mentioned just some of the Cuban achievements; the list is much longer.
We believe that this list proves the Cuban Revolution has been consolidated throughout its history. Nonetheless, the US government does not seem to settle for it and they still hope to destroy it. Their obsession with Castro prevents them from seeing that the Cuban Revolution is not a one-man (or two or three…) issue. It is the result of a complex process involving a PEOPLE as well as the interaction of many historical, political, and social phenomena. It has been an arduous process that originated in the 19th century. Ironically, the US abusive attitude toward the island, since then –not only since 1959– has been a significant detonator that triggered a long fight for independence and sovereignty.
In an article entitled Cuba published on September 14, 2010, The New York Times explains the US presupposition:
“For the last 50 years, a long line of American presidents –Republicans and Democrats alike–have tried to stare down Mr. Castro, without much success. He has proven to be a master of imagery, a complex strategist who managed to turn U.S. attempts against him and his country to his own advantage again and again. In the end, it appears that nature and human frailty may do what assassination attempts and a half-century-long embargo have failed to do –bring the Castro era to an end.”
All in all, the behavior of every US Administration since 1959 –including Obama’s – is indicative of their persistent betting on the death of Castro and the entire generation that led the Revolution. But this is a dead end which takes for granted that such a deep and popular social transformation going on for half a century revolves around one person or a small group of aging revolutionaries. In Cuba, the people have been protagonists of the ongoing social transformations. The most important decisions have always been fully debated on and made by the entire population, and ultimately approved by the National Assembly which is elected by the people every five years. Some of the most significant examples are, recently, the guidelines to overhaul the economy and the Labor Code (the new law regulating labor relations). Other past instances stand out, such as the approval of the Constitution in 1976 and the amendment to it in the early 2000’s declaring the irreversible socialist character of the society (both approved by the overwhelming majority of the people at the polls); also the decision in the 1990’s to develop tourism on a large scale, despite the downside that was anticipated, for example, the questions of how to maintain socialist commitments and values during a period in which Cuba is compelled to increasingly interface with the forces of global capital.
Cuba is governed by well-educated people that possess a rich and powerful historical and cultural legacy based on socialism, anti-colonial struggles, and international solidarity. This heritage has allowed us to lead a better life in spite of the setbacks discussed above. Giving up on that legacy would be a national suicide, while most people on the island understand that the system should be improved but never annihilated. In this context, no one could deny the paramount importance of our historical leadership headed up by Fidel Castro, especially in the midst of so much sustained animosity from history’s largest superpower. But they have been ingenious leaders that have worked hand-in-hand, always seeking consensus, with increasingly educated people (education involving also socialist and human values, not only instruction). On the other hand, young leaders are in charge more and more each day, like the First Vice-president of the State Council Miguel Díaz-Canel and the Minister of Foreign Affairs Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla; many youths and also women are deputies of the National Assembly or are in charge of institutions and organizations, which ensures the renovation of a revolutionary leadership aware that revolution is an ongoing, continuous, and complex historical process.
In this context, the Cuba-US relations appear to be in a crucial moment when a positive change could occur, according to the favorable atmosphere created by more and more people (influential ones among them) that support a shift in the relations. However, once more (we hope to be wrong), all these requests may fall on deaf ears, but why? What is the unforgivable crime Cuba has committed? If so many people in the United States and overseas support a different attitude and policy, why does it not happen? Who is against it?
It seems that the US policy with regard to Cuba has been hijacked by just a few Congress people of Cuban origin who act against their own roots, while the island does not seem to be a priority for the rest of the US policy makers.At least, that is what lies on the surface. A deeper answer can be put together by analyzing the reference books suggested earlier in this article. Cuba’s “unforgivable crime” seems to be the “unexpected” turn of events in the course of history. Before 1959, Cuba was pictured like a baby or a docile young lady under the full control of the United States, quietly sailing along the “sweet and calm” waters of the river laid out by the Monroe Doctrine and Manifest Destiny; but, “suddenly”, the “lovely lady” got out of hand and became an example for an entire continent. All left-wing movements in Latin America today have recognized Cuba as their forefather and have not hesitated to work together with the island on the basis of solidarity and mutual interests. Noam Chomsky explains in his recent article, “Whose Security? How Washington Protects Itself and the Corporate Sector:”[5]
“…‘The Castro idea of taking matters into one’s own hands’ [i.e. an independent and liberated Cuba was the real threat]. It was an idea that unfortunately appealed to the mass of the population in Latin America where ‘the distribution of land and other forms of national wealth greatly favors the propertied classes, and the poor and underprivileged, stimulated by the example of the Cuban revolution, are now demanding opportunities for a decent living.’
Nonetheless, as Chomsky also states in the same article, quoting none other than the CIA:
“…‘The extensive influence of ‘Castroism’ is not a function of Cuban power… Castro’s shadow looms large because social and economic conditions throughout Latin America invite opposition to ruling authority and encourage agitation for radical change,’ for which his Cuba provides a model. Kennedy feared that Russian aid might make Cuba a ‘showcase’ for development, giving the Soviets the upper hand throughout Latin America.”
Now the Soviets are gone and the left-wing tsunami in Latin America is overwhelming, largely for the reason explained by the CIA: it is a continent with abundant natural resources but permeated by hardships and deep inequities.
In this historical labyrinth two neighbor nations are trapped. Nevertheless, the Cuban leaders have extended their hands to the US government for discussions and negotiations based on equality and respect, but the offers have been turned down, over and over again, except when it comes to discussing immigration among other very few issues, while the big topics of the bilateral agenda remain untouched for the most part (the blockade, the Cuban Five in US penitentiaries, Allan Gross, the inclusion of Cuba on the US list of states that sponsor terrorism, Guantanamo Naval Base, illegal subversion programs against the island, like Zunzuneo or Commotion, among others). Cuba has even opened doors for talking about the supposed violation of human rights and the alleged lack of freedom of speech on the island.
Throughout the years, various excuses have been used to refuse negotiating with Cuba, apparently, to kill time awaiting the death of our historical leaders and the effect of the blockade and the subversion operations. One after the other, all the excuses have faded because of their weakness or because of the course of history. Claims such as “Cuba is a red menace,” “Cuba manufactures biological weapons,” Cuba sponsors terrorism,” etc., have all dissolved upon inspection. Today, remaining are old, relative, controversial, and murky concepts like those of “freedom,” “democracy,” or “human rights,” which are stubbornly brandished by the US government as pretexts not to sit down at the negotiating table. It just so happens that those banners are not conceptualized exactly in the same way on both sides of the Straits of Florida, but even those topics can be on the table for discussion, as the Cubans propose.
In the meantime, two great peoples remain distant although only ninety miles apart. Cuba does not demand any domestic change within the US as a condition to talk and cooperate. Its only condition is that there should be no conditions, except equality and respect. Given the potentials of both nations there is much we can do together for the common good! Do we have to wait another fifty years to accept each other the way we are?
In Cuba, we enjoy US music, movies, and TV series; we admire Abraham Lincoln and Ernest Hemingway, and we love the US people as well as the English language. But some of us feel that those US people we love are the only ones who could convince their authorities to bring an end to such a long and absurd estrangement between two neighbor nations that should be friends instead of foes. If the two governments cannot be best friends, at least, the peoples can be, while showing the necessary mutual respect to live in peace and solidarity, accept our differences, and make the best of it.
————————————————————————–
Yoan Karell Acosta González is a professor of English Language at the University of Havana. He has a Ph.D in Linguistics. One goal of the above piece is to open up dialogue and discussion between people in Cuba and people in the United States.
[1]See: Hard Choices, by Hillary Rodham Clinton, published in2014 inNueva York by Simon & Schuster.
[2]See: Cuba: Casi 2 millones de turistas en cinco meses de 2014, published in www.cubadebate.cu, on June 9, 2014.
[3]See:La Misión Milagro cumple hoy diez años: Ha devuelto la vista a 3,4 millones de pobres, published in www.cubadebate.cu, on July 8, 2014.
[4]See: Cuba es el país más seguro de la región, published in www.granma.cu, on May 24, 2012.
[5] Published in TomDispatch , on July 1, 2014:http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175863/tomgram%3A_noam_chomsky,_america%27s_real_foreign_policy/
ZNetwork is funded solely through the generosity of its readers.
Donate
2 Comments
Thank you Chris, your comments are very encouraging. We need many people like you in the States to work on asking for an end to the blockade and for the normalization of relations based on mutual respect. Cuba is ready. We no doubt have friends there who already struggle for justice and peace, while more US people are traveling to Cuba and seeing for themselves that our reality is different from the way it is portrayed in the mainstream media, but we need more people to join us. It is not easy but we have to persist.
Best regards,
Karell.
Yoan: I feel that it is a great opportunity to communicate with someone from your country. I am a substitute teacher, and I also supervise foster children at my non-profit-agency. When the opportunity arises I have also worked as a adjunct professor of history and sociology.
I also keep active in the community and in politics. I am a member of the Mountain Party in my state of West Virginia. We are a group of progressives whose most pressing local concern is limiting the over bearing influence of coal and natural gas companies who pollute our land and steal our elections.
We field candidates for local and national office. I feel an obligation to help our party to interject itself into broader national issues, like foreign policy. Currently, my church has made the effort to show support for Palestinians in the occupied territories, and. I would like to see the Mountain Party champion this pressing cause as well.
I recently reread Open Veins of Latin America, and I firmly believe that there is much room for expanded dialogue and solidarity between my country, your country and other countries in Latin America who are forging their independence. I also had the opportunity to attend a demonstration in support of the Cuban Five at the White House last summer. The following night, I attended a gathering at the Venezuelan Embassy, where the Canadian author of the book about the Cuban Five spoke.
One way that I think the blockade could be made understandable to the people of my state is to draw parallels between the negative stereotypes(Hill Billy stereotype) that are directed at our state by our national media, and the historical misinformation that has been directed at your country, mostly by the same media sources.
. in November, we will be voting in our state for Congress and the Senate. The Republic candidate for Congress is of Cuban heritage and js cut out of Marco Rubio and Ileana Ros-Liethen mold. Neither the Democrat or the independent candidate has thus far broached the issue of the embargo. I will do my best to get this issue, the Cuban Five case, and Latin America more generally, interjected into my church, the Mountain Party, and the campaign.
Revolutionary regards:
Chris Reed