Castro’s Resignation Means Nothing
I have heard so much hullabaloo about Fidel Castro stepping down as leader of Cuba this week that I thought I would give a brief opinion. Most of our opinion in the United States is based on a combination of 50 years of anti-Castro rhetoric along with the understandable anger of Cuban Americans. We do not have reasoned discourse regarding Castro, Communism and Cuba which means we cannot fully understand what the long-time leader’s resignation truly means.
We do not have sufficient critical distance to say that revolution will continue to sweep away Communist elements. Raul Castro has stated that economic controls may be loosened further to help Cubans meet their basic financial needs. We may not be capable of taking Mr. Castro at his word considering that his brother may wield power from behind the scenes and dissent in Cuba may grow as people yearn for greater changes. I think that any implication that the American government can do anything about the course of Cuban politics smacks of politics from the last century.
Cuba was placed under protectorate status by the United States following Spain’s loss to the Americans in the Spanish-American War. We trade the Teller Amendment that stated the course of Cuba belonged to Cubans with the Platt Amendment which gave us Guantanamo Bay and a position in Cuban affairs that would last until Castro took over. The Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations worked hard to get rid of Castro while bringing the world closer to nuclear war than at any other time in American history. We do not have a great track record of helping Cuba revolutionize its affairs.
People need to cool rhetoric about changing Cuban affairs and toppling the Castro family. The implication that we would do anything but deal diplomatically with a dying political family is a sign of Cold War thinking. We will continue our ridiculous embargo of Cuba which seems to contribute to poverty and privation as much as the Castro family’s perverted use of Marxism. Fidel Castro leaving office means that we will talk about Cuba as if it were 1962 all over again which means his resignation means nothing.
February 21st, 2008 at 6:40 pm
You’re right about us continuing to think with a “Cold War mentality” when it comes to Cuba. Odd, really, considering how buddy-buddy we are with so many other Communist countries these days when it suits our interests. Thanks, too, for pointing out the Platt Amendment. I’ll admit ignorance here, I really didn’t know anything about that, but always have wondered how we managed to garner Gitmo: “The Government of Cuba will sell or lease to the United States lands necessary for coaling or naval stations.” So that’s what’s going on there.