How Cuba defied US subversion playbook and paid the price
- The UN has again voted overwhelmingly to condemn the United States’ embargo against the island, with only America and Israel voting against
LINK HERE:
There are two questions that have puzzled many students of US foreign policy, that is, if they are not too ideologically pro-American. One is, why the United States’ unswerving, almost unconditional support of Israel? The other is, why its impeccable hostility towards Cuba, which is, for all intents and purposes, an insignificant dot on the world map? Washington has made nice with communist Vietnam, Laos and China before; why not Cuba?
By standing with one (Israel) and opposing the other (Cuba), it has stood against the entire world, and consistently so over decades, something that seems to defy rational national self-interest.
Two of the latest votes in the United Nations General Assembly are just more of the same.
Less than two weeks ago, the UN General Assembly voted 121 for a resolution, with 14 against and 44 abstained, for a humanitarian truce in Gaza. The US, of course, voted with Israel against the resolution. Almost half of those who joined them were tiny South Pacific island states whose economies greatly depend on US foreign aid and/or that of America’s close regional ally Australia – Fiji, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Papua New Guinea and Tonga.
Last week, the UN General Assembly again voted overwhelmingly against the US economic and trade embargo against Cuba, first imposed in 1960. A total of 187 states voted for the resolution put forward each year against the embargo with only the US and Israel voting against it. Ukraine, which used to be against the embargo, was the one and only abstention.
The US is different. Other powerful states may have an interest in the kind of governments that exist within their spheres of influence and a readiness to interfere with them if necessary. The Ukraine invasion, for example, is really about Russia’s attempt to defend its own sphere of influence, rather than threatening Ukraine’s Nato neighbours, which would be suicidal for Moscow.
But for the US, the entire world is considered its sphere of influence, including the global economy, cyberspace, deep sea and outer space. With countries or sub-state actors with which it can influence or interfere less and less, the more hostile it becomes.
Contrary to Washington’s propaganda, the US is perfectly happy to be friends with authoritarian governments, and hostile to democratic ones, if they prove too independent.
Again, contrary to US propaganda, China is equally happy to be friends with democratic and autocratic governments, so long as they are receptive to diplomatic and/or trade relations.
Countries that are not officially US allies or partners will nevertheless have political elements that are friendly to American interests. These may sometimes be in power; in which case, all fine and dandy. Or they may be in opposition, in which case, they will be promoted as “pro-democracy” and given funding, training and sometimes active international support, as, for example, with the anti-communist or “pro-democracy” opposition in Hong Kong. That’s all done in the name of “democracy” promotion. Subversion, never!
There are, however, a few countries in the world where no such opposition elements can be exploited to destabilise their societies and/or effect regime change with their governments. Cuba is one such country, and it has been the case since the Castro revolution. Lifting the embargo will enable Cuba to develop economically and improve its people’s living standards, thereby helping to legitimise its really socialist, rather than communist government.
That is the rationale behind the six-decade-old embargo, which has remained in place ever since, against world opinion.
By the way, the same failed policy has been replicated – times 10 – by Israel over Gaza for almost two decades, the background to Hamas’ atrocities and the Gaza war.
