It has always been the desire of independent nations to act as such: making their own decisions in accordance to their national interest and sovereignty. It is true that nationalism in this regard condones any form of external intervention and manipulation, especially if these actions can directly influence a nation’s political wellbeing. Such is the case between Cuba and the United States, whereby the history between these two nations during the past century is tainted with controversies concerning not only economic and military policies, but more so about displacing a duly-sworn leader who is deemed as perilous by an external global superpower. In this regard and despite of the present attempt of the Obama administration to smoothen and reinvigorate the inter-national trade between the two said nations, it cannot be denied that there were past actions perpetrated by the United States that were dictatorial if not tyrannical in nature. Specifically, this American endeavor was concerned with creating an artificial national mayhem in Cuba by military coup d’état and ultimately implanting a leader of their own choosing. Given this scenario, it is the argument of this paper that the US-Cuba relations has and always will be based on inter-national subjugation, as evidenced by past events, and that Cuba has every reason to distrust the real intent of the United States in re-strengthening their relationship.
The Cuba Revolution of 1959, led by Fidel Castro, was successful in removing a perceived repressive ruler, General Batista, with a charismatic and progressively revolutionary alternate. Authors Chomsky, Smorkaloff and Carr are united in observing that the Castro-led revolution is an expression of the need being felt by third-world nations “to escape from U.S. hegemony and take their destiny into their own hands” (Chomsky, Smorkaloff & Carr, 2009, p. 333). However, it must also be noted that the U.S. has interfered in a direct manner, albeit clandestinely, to remove Castro in power and install a ruler who is submissive and obedient to American interests. More so, it must be stressed that Castro was a legitimate ruler when the United States decided on an overthrow scheme led by the CIA in 1960, that was dubbed as “The Bay of Pigs Invasion” (The Bay of Pigs Invasion, 2016, p. 1). Here, the United States searched for former Cuban members of the defeated Frente Revolucionario Democratico (FRD) in Miami, in order to train and supply them with arms and ammunitions to eventually attempt to overthrow Castro’s regime. Hence, in this context it is clear that the US was interfering with Cuba’s internal and national concerns. Indeed, this American action totally contradicts with the tenets of democracy that is so often boasted by the United States. For this reason alone it is a safe premise that the United States cannot be relied upon to hold Cuba in equal terms, given that there have been attempts in past decades by the former to control the latter either by installing ‘friendly’ rulers or removing those deemed to act independently from what is benefiting to the Americans.
Another basis for the premise that the U.S. will continue to deny Cuba its rightful sovereignty is the fact that a portion of its land is still being used as a prison facility for high-risk suspected terrorists by the U.S. even in the present day. No less than Cuba’s current President, Raul Castro, has expressed this sentiment when he states that the U.S. is “in no position to lecture Cubathe United States military base at Guantanamo Bay should be returned to Cuba” (Davis & Cave, 2016, p. 1). Hence, trusting the U.S. to comply with a friendly treaty of mutual cooperation and trust may be an erroneous endeavor, especially when considering the fact that the base in Guantanamo Bay up to this day still remains in American control. This scenario is very similar with the socio-political condition prevailing in Cuba prior to Fidel Castro’s revolution from 1956 to 1959, wherein “a significant portion of Cuba’s sugar plantations were owned by North Americans” (The Bay of Pigs Invasion, 2016, p. 1). Indeed, both of these cases involve a geographic location in Cuba that is being controlled and used by Americans as if it were their own, when in fact these are parcels of land that are within the national limits of Cuba. Hence, this seeming insensitive and disrespectful attitude of the U.S. towards Cuba, both in past decades and in present time, is a sure indicator of U.S.’s real intent in guise of improving relations with Cuba, in that the former aims only to exploit the situation to their own advantage.
Hence, the agendas of the meeting between President Obama and President Raul Castro which center on their nations’ “economic and political differences and human rights” (Plummer, 2016, p. 1) may be very hard to achieve. This is because of the U.S.’s history of incursion against Cuban exclusive national affairs, such as in instances of unfair farming practices, training armed militia to invade Cuba, and the attempt to remove a rightful albeit ‘unfriendly’ ruler in Fidel Castro by violent means. As such, it is indeed hard to imagine how an independent nation will be able to trust another when it has consistently shown self-interest in their bilateral inter-national relationship, such as in the case between Cuba and the United States. More so, U.S.’s intent of invading Cuba in the past was not simply limited to political manipulation, but on armed struggle that will surely result to loss of lives, both military and civilian.
Thus, U.S.’s disregard for human lives just to attain their self-serving agendas is a sure sign that they are not truly interested in mutual cooperation and development. This becomes even more apparent when considering the three stages that the United States had envisioned their goal to come into fruition with regard to the Bay of Pigs invasion. The first phase of this invasion plan is to obliterate Castro’s air force planes so that the Cubans would lose their ability for a swift retaliation. This would be followed by stage two, which is to eliminate any remaining planes that were not hit during the first phase. The third and last phase is the invasion itself, wherein some of the U.S.-trained militia from the remnants of the FRD would infiltrate Cuba via the shorelines of Trinidad, while others would parachute further inland (The Bay of Pigs Invasion, 2016, p. 1). From these phases, what becomes clear is the realization that it is highly likely that lives will be lost, either due to bombing, air attacks, the invasion proper itself, and also the ensuing unavoidable armed clashes between the two warring armies. As such, it is easily comprehendible that due to the imminent deaths among the two forces, not to mention the civilian casualties, the United States is more than willing to sacrifice Cuban lives just to be able to install a leader that they can manipulate, unlike Fidel Castro who has shown an inclination to side with the USSR instead of the U.S. Thus, this intent to invade Cuba by the U.S. signifies America’s aspiration to control Cuba, which casts doubt on the latter’s true intention of desiring for a more peaceful accord in the present era.
However, it cannot be denied that current American intentions may indeed be genuine, in the sense that they truly desire to rectify the mistakes of the past decades with inter-nation economic reforms. This is clearly expressed by President Obama upon his recent visit to Cuba when he declared that “I affirm that Cuba’s destiny will not be decided by the United Statesand the future of Cuba will be decided by Cubans, not by anybody else” (Davis & Cave, 2016, p. 1). As such, at least from this statement, it is apparent that the United States at present does not harbor any intent of once again removing Cuba’s president. In addition, President Obama has likewise declared that he expects the long-standing economic embargo to be lifted (Davis & Cave, 2016, p. 1), which will undoubtedly result to Cuba’s economic strengthening. Given these arguments, while it is certain that the U.S. had once resulted to immoral and illegal means of manipulating Cuba’s political structure to their own advantage, it may also be true that the passing of generations and the changing of global climate have resulted to U.S.’s change of attitude towards Cuba. Certainly, President Obama seems to be honest in his intentions of bettering U.S.-Cuba relations since he opted to visit Cuba himself, which never happened for more than half a century. If this is the case and U.S. is indeed true in its goals, then assuredly Cuba will benefit greatly from improved relations with the U.S.
In this respect, perhaps a prudent way of ensuring that the U.S. will never again impose its will over Cuba’s sovereignty is by allowing the United Nations to monitor the relationship between the two nations. This may include limiting U.S military presence at any given time or instigating fair practices act on economic policies, both of which will prove beneficial to both parties concerned.
Despite of current positive developments between the U.S. and Cuba, it is highly doubtful that the U.S. will act minus any amount of self-serving interests. This is given that the previous American attempts to control Cuba are replete with greed, power-grabbing and even murder. In this respect, it must be noted that despite of the abolition of the USSR, new regional powers have emerged that emulate similar threats presented by the Soviets in past decades, which is global dominance. For this reason alone, it may be erroneous to ponder that the United States is truly inclined to help Cuba economically, without even the slightest agenda of once again ruling the Cuban part of North America.
References
Chomsky, A., Smorkaloff, P.M., & Carr, B. (2009). The Cuba reader: History, culture, politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Davis, J.H., & Cave, D. (2016, March 21). Cuba meeting between Obama and Castro exposes old grievances. The New York Times. Retrieved from <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/22/world/americas/obama-and-raul-castro-to-meet-in-pivotal-moment-for-us-cuba-thaw.html?_r=2>
Plummer, J. (2016). ‘Obama and Raul Castro meet in pivotal moment in US-Cuba Thaw’ by Julia Plummer pd 1. Retrieved from <http://countrymanapushcurrentevents.blogspot.com/2016/03/obama-and-raul-castro-meet-in-pivotal.html>
The Bay of Pigs Invasion. (2016, April 18). In Central Intelligence Agency.org. Retrieved from <https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2016-featured-story-archive/the-bay-of-pigs-invasion.html>
