On Cuba: Reflections on 70 Years of Revolution and Struggle

Introduction

In 1959, the Cuban Revolution erupted onto the global stage, catching the world off guard. The island nation soon transformed into a hub for foreign journalists, eager students, and deep-thinking intellectuals, all determined to witness the unfolding social experiment with their own eyes. They were drawn to this Caribbean crucible of change like moths to a flame, all asking the question: what next?

The early 1960s saw a generation of intellectuals leaning toward the left, their gaze firmly set on Cuba’s burgeoning revolution. Amid the tumultuous vortex of the Cold War, they attempted to decipher the political trajectory of this small nation shaking off the shackles of imperialism. Among U.S. intellectuals, many sought to shield the Revolution from the aggression of their own nation, insisting that the Cuban Revolution was not the spawn of communism as its critics alleged. Simultaneously, by the middle of 1960, certain foreign observers such as Leo Huberman and Paul Sweezy, editors of the Monthly Review, had begun labeling the Cuban Revolution as socialist, even before Fidel himself publicly declared the term.

One of the curious minds that made this journey was C. Wright Mills, the revered sociologist from Columbia University. Known for his seminal studies on the American class structure in the aftermath of World War II, his works White Collar and The Power Elite had already established him as an astute observer of societal shifts. For two weeks in August 1960, Mills immersed himself in the Cuban experience, even spending three days journeying with Fidel Castro himself. His mission was clear: to pen a book that would capture the voices of the Cuban revolutionaries and articulate their aspirations to the world. Unlike his peers, Mills perceived the Cuban revolutionaries through a different lens. He saw them as Marxists, engaged in the monumental task of constructing a socialism with heart on an island that had long been the victim of underdevelopment.

The triumph of the Cuban Revolution in 1959 was met with a belligerent stance from the U.S. government. Despite initially acknowledging the government of the newly inaugurated president Manuel Urrutia a mere week after the revolutionaries had dethroned the oppressive regime of Fulgencio Batista, the U.S. proceeded to sabotage the Cuban Revolution, especially after Fidel Castro was elevated to the position of prime minister in February 1959. When Castro sought to visit the United States in April, President Dwight Eisenhower declined to meet him. This marked the beginning of a steady decline in relations, culminating in the United States severing ties with Cuba in 1961 and implementing a series of destabilizing tactics coordinated by the CIA: from over six hundred assassination attempts on Castro to terrorist activities under Operation Mongoose on the island and the Bay of Pigs invasion by right-wing Cuban exiles. With these insidious acts, the U.S. immediately set the tone for official policy toward the new, revolutionary Cuba. In 1962, the Kennedy administration initiated a blockade against Cuba, launching a relentless campaign of starvation and deprivation against the island’s 11 million inhabitants that still chokes the island to this day.

However, it was not the people of the United States who condemned Cuba, despite the actions of their government. Just after the Revolution’s victory, two potent sociopolitical forces within the United States—the Black liberation movement and socialist organizations—immediately rallied behind the Cuban Revolution.

When Castro journeyed to New York to participate in the 1960 UN General Assembly meeting before the U.S. had officially cut off ties with Cuba, he and his delegation were kicked out of their accommodations and left without a place to stay. Malcolm X stepped in and arranged for the Cuban delegation to lodge at Hotel Theresa in Harlem, a gesture that showcased the profound connections between the Black liberation movement and the Cuban revolutionaries across the sea. When Eisenhower denied Castro entry to his luncheon with other Latin American leaders, Castro responded by hosting his own gathering at a Harlem coffee shop for Hotel Theresa’s employees, whom he referred to as the poor and humble people of Harlem. In a meeting between Castro and Malcolm X, the latter affirmed, there are 20 million of us and we always understand, highlighting the solidarity of the revolutionary process.

In March 1960, Leo Huberman and Paul Sweezy undertook a journey to Cuba to witness the Revolution firsthand. They interacted with key revolutionaries (Castro and Che Guevara), state officials, new civic bodies, and everyday Cubans. Upon their return to New York, Huberman and Sweezy published their observations in a special issue of their socialist publication, entitled Cuba: Anatomy of a Revolution. Later that year, they released their report as a book with Monthly Review Press. This book was among the earliest to argue that the Cuban Revolution—fueled by its fierce commitment to sovereignty—was naturally evolving in a socialist direction. Huberman and Sweezy revisited the Revolution several times, with Huberman’s Socialism in Cuba (1960) becoming highly regarded on the island for its empathetic critique of the Cuban process. The relationship between Monthly Review (the press and the magazine) and the Cuban Revolution has been enduring and significant.

Almost thirty years later, against the backdrop of the enduring blockade, the Third World debt crisis, and the dissolution of the Soviet Union, Cuba found itself compelled to embark upon a comprehensive reform agenda, albeit without ever wavering in its commitment to education, health, and collective well-being. The third congress of the Cuban Communist Party in 1986 adopted a new economic management and planning system, which incorporated wage reform, the integration of the market system into agriculture, the liberalization of production sectors, and the sale of public enterprises. These reforms carried an undertone of emergency given the decline in productivity in Cuba and the challenge of diversifying exports following a disappointing sugar harvest in 1970. The collapse of the USSR in 1991 forced Cuba into a Special Period, which, despite popular belief that it ended in the 2000s, continues to persist. The worst of the Special Period was alleviated following the inception of the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela in 1999, though the hybrid war waged against Venezuela by the United States has hindered its ability to provide ample material support and solidarity to the Cuban population.

The disintegration of the Soviet Union also swiftly dispelled any hopes of a change in Washington, DC, as lawmakers enacted a series of harsh legislations aimed at tightening the stranglehold on Cuba. In fact, the United States’ agenda of global hegemony has continually clashed with Cuba’s pursuit of independence and sovereignty, and these clashes have only grown more intense since the Revolution’s victory in 1959. The Cuban Democracy Act of 1992 (Torricelli Act) and the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 (Helms-Burton Act) reinforced the framework of the U.S. blockade against Cuba. Even the occasional openings—mostly to benefit the U.S. agriculture lobby and select U.S. corporations on the prowl for markets—were quickly sealed whenever a bitter wind blew from Miami’s Cuban exiles to the lawmakers on Capitol Hill. President Barack Obama attempted to restore a semblance of balance, initiating a dialogue about normalization with the Cuban government in 2009 and later visiting Cuba in 2016. The establishment of transportation networks and the operation of foreign businesses in Cuba represented small openings against the blockade.

But the United States has intensified its blockade against Cuba over the past six years, starting with former president Donald Trump. Upon assuming office, Trump promptly shuttered these openings and vowed to dismantle the Cuban Revolution, in addition to his promise to overthrow the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela and the Nicaraguan Revolution. The Trump administration labeled these the troika of tyranny and pledged their undoing through a campaign of maximum pressure led by the United States. In 2017, the U.S. accused the Cuban government of deploying sonic attacks against its embassy officials, a claim that was later disproven. However, this accusation served as a pretext to freeze relations with Cuba, causing a collapse in tourism and leading to significant loss of revenue as more than 600,000 annual U.S. visitors ceased their travels to the island. Trump also implemented 243 new sanctions, reversing the normalization process initiated by former president Obama in 2014. Under Trump’s sanctions, Western Union halted operations in Cuba in 2020, disrupting remittances. Visa services were suspended by the U.S. embassy in Havana in 2017, sparking the largest wave of irregular migration since 1980.

In his last week in office in January 2021, former president Trump put Cuba on the U.S. State Sponsors of Terrorism list, making it nearly impossible for Cuba to engage in normal financial transactions necessary for trade. During President Joe Biden’s first fourteen months in office, the Cuban economy lost an estimated $6.35 billion as a result, preventing Cuba from making crucial investments in its aging energy grid or purchasing food and