The United State's initial stance on Cuba was one of tolerance towards the Castro regime in order to provide this government a chance to establish a reasonable relationship with the U.S. While the radical and anti-American background of the Castro family was well documented, such as their involvement with Communist causes, the future direction of this government could not be predicted, despite grave doubts held by American analysts. Castro had maintained that Cuba would be a democratic government, having elected officials and that the government would honor international obligations and agreements. While U.S. officials were skeptical about the future of democracy in Cuba, a "wait and see" policy was adopted because of the popularity Castro enjoyed in the Western Hemisphere and the rest of the world, such that officials felt there was little alternative.
[...] The risk of a nuclear war between the USSR and the United States is elevated with the ability of the Soviet Union to use Cuba as an ally. Relations with Cuba will not improve as Castro continues to play on U.S-Cuba tensions for his political benefit, to make irrational demands and not make any compromise in negotiations. Soviet support has also reached the point of no return, we can not hope in displacing their influence. Recommendation of Action As it is quite obvious from this analysis, a solution to the Cuban threat is not easily apparent. [...]
[...] The continuation of an outwardly non-interventionist U.S policy toward Cuba would be the worst choice of action given the documentation of U.S-Cuban relations over the last two years. The primary threat to the U.S. is the growth of Communism in the Western World. The recommendation by this office is to remove the economic retaliations and improve the economy of Cuba with the aim of reducing this country being a foothold for Communism. Rather than tolerate anti-U.S. actions we will support the efforts of the Cuban government to improve the quality of the lives of the poverty-stricken people so that they see the benefits of the capitalist market. [...]
[...] The U.S embargoed exports to Cuba, and Cuba responded by confiscating most of the remaining American-owned enterprises. Interestingly, Cuban economy has actually improved in some sectors despite U.S. efforts to weaken Cuban economy[12]. This outcome demonstrates that economic sanctions are not necessarily effective. The U.S. retracting its supply of grain, lard, rice, automotive parts, etc has had little effect and the ban on the import of Cuban sugar has back-fired as the result of these two policies has been to create an economic vacuum which our enemies will readily fill. [...]
[...] In short, the United States is confronted with a hostile neighbor, that in spite of its small size, it poses a large threat to our national security, as I will detail below. Examination of the current status of the Cuban Threat Anti-Americanism Two years of open attacks by Castro on the U.S., have damaged the U.S reputation in Latin America, particularly by inspiring doubts in those who have less direct influence by America, being the poverty stricken, uninformed masses in Cuba . [...]
[...] To build public support in Cuba among the middle and lower classes the transitional government might be built around the original cabinet that took over following the fall of Batista. The Cuban public must come to believe that this new government is committed to “rescuing” the revolution. If the U.S. were to give active support to a government in exile while an overthrow were being planned, The U.S. would be subject to charges of violation of provisions among the U.N and the O.A.S (Organization of American States) charter. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
