Jason Perra: Blog Post 1 - Cuba From Colonization, Through, & Since The Revolution

 Cuba From Colonization, Through, & Since The Revolution

When Colón first arrived in Cuba in 1492, he wrote that the island “Es la tierra más hermosa que ojos humanos vieron.”  Despite its apparent beauty to early Spanish settlers and the indigenous Arawak people, the island was relatively unimportant to the Spanish until the 19th century while Spain lost most of its empire when, in a few short years, the island was turned into a major producer of sugar with the increased abduction and smuggling of Africans to the island.  Cuba did not leave Spain due to the sudden attention, but rather became the “crown jewel” of the Spanish Empire.  

Nevertheless, Cubans mounted the Ten Years’ War against Spain from 1868 to 1878 in a first attempt at independence.  This war was unsuccessful for Cubans, but another War of Independence began in 1895, with José Martí’s death shortly after its inception.  In 1898, the US Navy, led by a war-hungry Theodore Roosevelt, either staged or negligently caused the explosion of the USS Maine in the Port of Havana.  The US falsely blamed the explosion on Spain and used it as a justification for the subsequent Spanish-American War in 1898.  With the knowledge revealed in history, it appears that the real reason for the war was for the US to intervene in the Cuban struggle for independence.  The United States did effectively colonize Cuba from 1898 until May 20, 1902.  

This raises an interesting question: had the Ten Years’ War (1868-78) been successful, there may never have been American intervention in Cuba, and a fully independent Cuba may have existed from the onset.  How would this Cuba have evolved differently throughout the 20th century?  

Culturally, Cuba from its independence until the revolution appears to have been more or less a Caribbean Las Vegas from the outside perspective of the United States.  During this time, the US engaged in numerous military interventions in Cuba and established Guantánamo Bay Naval Base.  American corporations similarly had significant involvement in all sectors of the Cuban economy, which slowed local economic growth to a trickle and imposed Cuban dependence on the United States.  

Right-wing authoritarianism rose until the 1930s, when the US imposed Carlos Manuel de Céspedes as dictator in 1933, and later backed Fulgencio Basista y Zaldívar who became a brutal right-wing dictator in a coup on March 10, 1952.  As a result, the Cuban Revolution began on July 26, 1953 (Inspiring M26J) with Fidel Castro’s failed attack on military barracks.  Fidel, Raúl Castro, Che Guevara, and 79 others, returned to Cuba aboard the Granma in late 1956.  The revolution ended when Fidel Castro came to power on January 1, 1959.  

Due to the overwhelming US influence in Cuba, much Cuban land and economic power was unfairly held by foreign nationals and corporations.  Castro began expropriating US properties and investments in Cuba in 1959 and 1960.  This is the original and official rationale for the US embargo on Cuba, which began to protect corporate interests on October 19, 1960.  

This raises important questions: Was the revolution the singular creation of Castro, or the result of socioeconomic conditions?  I argue the latter, with the primary cause being overwhelming US economic, political, and military intervention.  Was this expropriation reasonable?  I argue yes.  Was the embargo a reasonable response?  I would say not.  

The embargo continues to this day for a variety of factors: Cuban alignment with the Soviet Union, irrational American fear of “communism”, and later the Helms-Burton Act of 1996 which, in blatant violation of international law, economically attacks any nation doing business with Cuba and attempts to compensate American megacorporations who were (and still are) upset that “their” land had been confiscated more than 40 years prior.  

The principal achievement of the Cuban Revolution was abolishing a brutal right-wing dictatorship and ending American exploitation of the island.  Unfortunately, the US continues to abuse its superior economic position to harm the Cuban people in revenge.  In a practical sense, the contemporary economic position of the Cuban people is not good in any sense of the word, and Cuba must find a way to improve its position.  This failure to sustainably improve the economic situation is the Revolution’s most significant failure.  

I don’t believe Cuba would necessarily be better today if there had never been a revolution.  Without a revolution, corporate interests would have exploited the island to the extent that its people are in a similar position as they are today.  Cubans are not wealthy, but their lives are often better than those of their Caribbean neighbors.  Cuba is the safest nation in the Caribbean, and Cubans live longer and healthier lives on average than their neighbors in Mexico, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, or Jamaica.  

Comments

  1. Repeating them here for ease since they're embedded in the text:
    Questions:
    1) Had the Ten Years’ War (1868-78) been successful, there may never have been American intervention in Cuba, and a fully independent Cuba may have existed from the onset. How would this Cuba have evolved differently throughout the 20th century?
    2) Was this expropriation reasonable? Was the embargo a reasonable response?

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is interesting to think of Cuba as being fully independent. I believe Cuban heritage, arts, dance, and culture would have remained more pure towards the indigenous people. Cuba is a unique combination of European, American, and African influences, but with less of these influences, I think the arts and culture would show even more nationalism. Politically, I am unsure as to how the country would act. By the end of the 19th century, Cuba had become desired because of its sugar and tobacco supply, and strategic location. During this time, conflict arose as the Cuban Creole people and the Spaniards both wanted to govern the island. So, if Cuba had become independent, and the Cuban Creole people governed the land, no one could be sure of how their governance could have turned out.

    Your word choice is interesting as you question whether the U.S. "staged" the explosion of the USS Maine. I have not thought of this being a possibility, and I am interested in diving deeper into this conspiracy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This is a very thorough write-up, and one I largely agree with. The one think I was left questioning was the implication that the United States intentionally blew up the U.S.S. Maine. As far as I'm aware, all evidence points to the fact that poor storage conditions led to an accidental explosion in the powder magazine. As for your questions...

    1. I think its almost impossible to say. Like you said, most of modern Cuban history has been hugely influenced by United States intervention. I would think that, due to its beautiful landscape and large tobacco and sugar production, it most likely would have become a relatively successful trading nation and tourist destination. The prominence of the mafia, casinos, and brothels likely would've stayed the same, as the rebels didn't seem to have too much issue with these institutions.

    2. I think the expropriation was extremely reasonable. The country had become socialist, and Fidel Castro was trying to stimulate the sugar-dependent Cuban economy. As for the embargo, while I understand why the U.S. did it, I don't think it was morally correct actions. Sanctions and embargos have proved time and again that they simply punish the poorest people of a nation. This is exactly what happened in Cuba. The government didn't change, but the working class got poorer and hungrier.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Alex and Stephen,
    Thanks for the responses! I don't mean to dump fuel on the conspiracy theory fire, so the causes of the Maine explosion could have been worded better - as Stephen mentioned, the most likely explanation was an accidental explosion in the powder magazine. This has sometimes been attributed to improper storage (fueling the negligence argument) so that should have been presented first as it is a far more probable explanation.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Blog 5 - My Three Places to Visit

Blog #2- Brynn Hespeler

Emma Kostyun's Three Places She'd Like to Visit