Cuban American Revolution Research Paper

Revolution in Cuba and Nicaragua

The birth of both the Cuban and Nicaraguan revolutions started from very similar significant factors, both international and domestic. The United States foreign policy, throughout the Cold War and much of the mid 20th Century, was aimed at stopping the spread of communism by any means. This intervention and support even extended to non-democratic military regimes such as in Cuba and Nicaragua, as the U.S. feared their unstable governments and dissatisfied people would turn to communism for change. Following the successful revolution in Cuba led by Fidel Castro and his implementation of marxist principles, as well as the loss of control in Nicaragua in 1979, U.S. fears were all but realized. U.S. interventionism,

socio-economic inequality, corruption, and political instability all played major roles in the Cuban and Nicaraguan revolutions.
Solely based off of its’ foreign policy interests, the United States contributed greatly to Cuban unrest and lack of autonomy.

Following the December 10th, 1899 peace treaty between U.S. and Spain, the United States established a military government in formerly Spanish occupied Cuba. By 1905, 13,000 United States nationals owned 60% of Cuban rural properties as well as 90% of the tobacco export trade. With a near monopoly in the Cuban economy, Cubans quickly realized that any decisions made, regarding the future of their country, would be made by foreigners. The United States built Cuban schools, roads, telegraphs, and declared the right to intervene in domestic policies .The United States came to own about 75% of the Cuban economy and contributed to huge numbers of unemployment and poverty for a large part of the Cuban population .As one of Cuba’s biggest customers, the United States even owned plantations which only increased Cuba’s dependency to the U.S.. This system of exploitative capitalism brought immense prosperity to some and inequality to many. Politically, Cuba was home to one of the most corrupt governments in the world between 1920 and 1930. Flogencio Batista reigned for 25 years through puppet presidents while collecting earnings from gangsters, tourists, and gamblers. The rich elites were typically tied in one way or another with U.S. influence while the rest of the country struggled. They enjoyed luxuries such as U.S. cars and clothing. Cuba’s ruling class was made up of only very wealthy individuals who supported the country’s pattern of corruption to further their own agenda’s. Meanwhile, due to U.S. and other foreign demand and influence, the Cuban economy’s reliance on sugar exports created an unstable socio-economic structure where those at the top were typically foreign entrepreneurs. Cuban sovereignty did not exist during this time period as it lacked any sense of political and economic autonomy. Additionally, corrupt Cuban

officials made change nearly impossible. Misdirection of public goods and revenue was very common and only perpetuated growing gaps of inequality. These negatively penetrating issues led to the desire for a new national identity, sovereignty, and equality. “The Castro regime seems to have sprung from a deep and widespread dissatisfaction with social and economic conditions as they have been heretofore in Cuba and respond to an overwhelming demand for change and reform” .
Similar to the struggles in Cuba, Nicaragua faced economic problems and social unrest due to U.S. intervention, corruption, and socio-economic disparities. Due to the discovered possibility of a highly profitable canal connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean, Nicaragua attracted a large amount of international attention for its potential as an international shipping port. José Santos Zelaya, considered by the United States an enemy to their international interests, was thrown out of power by a group of U.S. supported militants. Financial crisis ensued as the United States broke off relations and sent in U.S. marines to create a sense of order. In order to protect international interests, William Howard Taft and the United States created a short plan for recovery and Nicaragua became a protectorate of the U.S.. Kirkpatrick says that the United States did not realize “that the only likely result of an effort to replace an incumbent autocrat with one of his moderate critics or a ‘broad-based coalition’ would be to sap the foundations of the existing regime without moving the nation any closer to democracy” . In order to maintain order the U.S. placed Anastasio Somoza in power. Following his assassination in 1956, Somaza’s two sons assumed the dictatorship one after the other in brutal fashion until forced to flee in 1979. Throughout this time period with 50% of the population being employed in agriculture social inequality was extremely pervasive in the economic structure of Nicaragua. The average income of the 5% tiny elite was twenty times higher than the lower 50%. This lower 50% of the population received only 15% of the national income and also faced extremely high literacy rates. Meanwhile, urban populations had a still unimpressive rate of 25% illiteracy. There were also alarming distribution of valuable land. In the usage of valuable farmland, as agriculture was such an important yet ultimately limiting means of economic growth, the distribution between locally run farms and export oriented government farms was immense. The bottom 58% of farms took only 3.4% of farmland compared to the .6% of large farms occupying 31%. This constant state of instability and social inequality along with U.S. intervention led to the emergence of communist supporting groups such as the Frente Sandinista de Liberacion Nacional, (FSLN) and eventual revolution.
Due to the similar struggles in Cuba and Nicaragua directly caused by U.S. involvement as well as widespread corruption, economic inequality, and social unrest the people of both countries had no choice but to revolt. Only the total upheaval of standing socio-economic and political values could bring about the change they needed and deserved. Whether or not the communist shift with the Fidel Castro regime was right for Cuba, the Cuban people were starving for liberation from the exploitative system of near ownership and total corruption they endured while under the U.S.’s greedy thumb. “The result of U.S. opposition was to contribute to a profound crisis that transformed the proposition of revolution. The United States assumed the role of adversary; and henceforth the conventions that had insinuated themselves into almost every facet of Cuban life were subject to repudiation. It thus became increasingly difficult to hold on to North American affiliations without inviting scorn and arousing suspicion” The U.S. involvement in Cuba allowed for further corruption of local politicians and fed the capitalist machine that obliterated Cuban society. The only escape from the vice grip of corruption and economic disaster was revolution. “In many Latin American countries, revolution was inevitable. This fact is not determined by the will of anyone. It is determined by the horrible conditions of exploitation under which the American people live, the development of a revolutionary consciousness in the masses, the worldwide crisis of imperialism, and the universal liberation movements of the subjugate nations” .
The exploitative hand of U.S. interventionism, the injustice of socio-economic inequality, the disease of corruption, and the fragility of the established political institutions came together and fueled the Cuban and Nicaraguan revolutions. While social inequality and unrest amongst all classes of people were terrible, there is no way that it could have led to a revolution without another factor that fueled their desire for change. It was the United States intervening in their countries that caused the people to react and push away the capitalistic super-power, therefore leading them into revolution.