I want to talk with you tonight about the most
glaring failure of American foreign policy today - about a disaster that
threatens the security of the whole Western Hemisphere - about a Communist
menace that has been permitted to arise under our very noses, only 90 miles
from our shores. I am talking about the one friendly island that our own
shortsighted policies helped make communism's first Caribbean base: the
island of Cuba.
Two years ago in September of 1958 - bands
of bearded rebels descended from Cuba's Sierra Maestra Mountains and began
their long march on Havana - a march which ended in the overthrow of the
brutal, bloody, and despotic dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista.
The slogans, the manifestos, and the broadcasts
of this revolution reflected the deepest aspirations of the Cuban people.
They promised individual liberty and free elections. They promised an end
to harsh police-state tactics. They promised a better life for a people
long oppressed by both economic and political tyranny.
But in the 2 years since that revolution swept
Fidel Castro into power, those promises have all been broken. There have
been no free elections - and there will be none as long as Castro rules.
All political parties - with the exception of the Communist Party - have
been destroyed. All political dissenters have been executed, imprisoned,
or exiled. All academic freedom has been eliminated. All major newspapers
and radio stations have been seized. And all of Cuba is in the iron grip
of a Communist-oriented police state.
Castro and is gang have betrayed the ideals
of the Cuban revolution and the hopes of the Cuban people.
But Castro is not just another Latin American
dictator - a petty tyrant bent merely on personal power and gain. His ambitions
extend far beyond his own shores. He has transformed the island of Cuba
into a hostile and militant Communist satellite - a base from which to
carry Communist infiltration and subversion throughout the Americas. With
guidance, support, and arms from Moscow and Peiping, he has made anti-Americanism
a sign of loyalty and anti-communism a punishable crime - confiscated over
a billion dollars' worth of American property - threatened the existence
of our naval base at Guantanamo - and rattled red rockets at the United
States, which can hardly close its eyes to a potential enemy missile or
submarine base only 90 miles from our shores.
He has transformed the island into a supply
depot for Communist arms and operations throughout South America - recruiting
small bands of Communist-directed revolutionaries to serve as the nucleus
of future Latin revolutions. "This army," Castro has boasted, "begins in
Cuba and ends in Argentina." His abusive anti-American and pro-Communist
messages are carried in books and newspapers shipped to every corner of
the hemisphere - often concealed in diplomatic pouches - and handed out
together with Soviet propaganda by the Cuban embassies. Presna Latina -
Latin America's largest news agency, controlled from Havana - carries anti-American
and pro-Soviet dispatches throughout the hemisphere. And Radio Mambi -
the anchor station of a network which will be beamed at the entire South
American continent - broadcasts constant attacks on the United States and
the leaders of every Latin American democracy.
Exploiting the twin themes of human misery
and Yankee hatred, Castro's campaign has met with success in almost every
country - in Brazil, where both Presidential candidates found it politically
expedient to appeal to pro-Castro and anti-American elements in the electorate
- in Mexico, where anti-American riots followed pressure on a pro-Castro
spokesman - in Guatemala, where Castro-equipped revolutionaries are a real
menace - in Urugnay, where a general strike was threatened if Castro was
not supported at the San Jose Conference. And - at the same foreign ministers'
conferenc - the United States suffered one of its few diplomatic defeats
in the history of inter-American relations, when it was forced to withdraw
its protest over Communist efforts in this hemisphere.
This is a critical situation - to find so
dangerous an enemy on our very doorstep. The American people want to know
how this was permitted to happen - how the Iron Curtain could have advanced
almost to our front yard. They want to know the truth - and I believe that
they are entitled to the truth. It is not enough to blame it on unknown
State Department personnel. Major policy on issues such as Cuban security
is made at the highest levels - in the National Security Council and elsewhere
- and it is the party in power which must accept full responsibility for
this disaster.
The story of the transformation of Cuba from
a friendly ally to a Communist base is - in large measure - the story of
a government in Washington which lacked the imagination and compassion
to understand the needs of the Cuban people - which lacked the leadership
and vigor to move forward to meet those needs - and which lacked the foresight
and vision to see the inevitable results of its own failures.
And it is a tragic irony that even while these
policies of failure here were being pursued our policymakers received repeated
and urgent warnings that international communism was becoming a moving
force behind Mr. Castro and the revolution - that our interest and the
interests of freedom were in danger - that a new Soviet satellite was in
the making.
Our Ambassador to Cuba in the early days of
the revolution - Arthur Gardner - repeatedly warned the administration
that communism was a moving force in the Castro leadership. Testifying
recently before a Senate committee, he was asked if he had not reported
"that Castro talked and acted like a Communist and should not be supported
by the United States." "That was absolutely correct," he replied, and he
went on to say: "We all knew * * * that Raul Castro was a Communist;" but
his warnings, he testified, were ignored, overlooked, or circumvented as
the menace of Cuban communism grew.
Our Ambassador to Cuba in the closing years
of the revolution - Earl Smith - also warned us that communism threatened
Cuba. He, too, was asked by the same Senate committee if he had been warning
"that Castro was a Marxist." "Yes, sir," he replied; but his warnings also
had been consistently ignored.
And the State Department itself, in a paper
issued little more than a month ago - belatedly admitted that "Communist
influence existed in the early days of the revolution."
But, if we are not to imitate the partisan
irresponsibility of others, we must do more than charge that these storm
signals were ignored. The real question is: What should we have done? What
did we do wrong? How did we permit the Communists to establish this foothold
90 miles away?
The answer is fourfold.
First, we refused to help Cuba meet its desperate
need for economic progress. In 1953 the average Cuban family had an income
of $6 a week. Fifteen to twenty percent of the labor force was chronically
unemployed.
Only a third of the homes in the island even
had running water, and in the years which preceded the Castro revolution
this abysmal standard of living was driven still lower as population expansion
out-distanced economic growth.
Only 90 miles away stood the United States
- their good neighbor - the richest Nation on earth - its radios and newspapers
and movies spreading the story of America's material wealth and surplus
crops.
But instead of holding out a helping hand
of friendship to the desperate people of Cuba, nearly all our aid was in
the form of weapons assistance - assistance which merely strengthened the
Batista dictatorship - assistance which completely failed to advance the
economic welfare of the Cuban people - assistance which enabled Castro
and the Communists to encourage the growing belief that America was indifferent
to Cuban aspirations for a decent life.
This year Mr. Nixon admitted that if we had
formulated a program of Latin American economic development 5 years ago:
"It might have produced economic progress in Cuba which might have averted
the Castro takeover." But what Mr. Nixon neglects to mention is the fact
that he was in Cuba 5 years ago himself - gaining experience. He saw the
conditions. He talked with the leaders. He knew what our aid program consisted
of. But his only conclusion as stated in a Havana press conference, was
his statement that he was "very much impressed with the competence and
stability" of the Batista dictatorship.
Mr. Nixon could not see then what should have
been obvious - and which should have been even more obvious when he made
his ill-fated Latin American trip in 1958 - that unless the Cuban people,
with our help, made substantial economic progress, trouble was on its way.
If this is the kind of experience Mr. Nixon claims entitles him to be President,
then I would say that the American people cannot afford many more such
experiences.
Secondly, in a manner certain to antagonize
the Cuban people, we used the influence of our Government to advance the
interests of and increase the profits of the private American companies,
which dominated the island's economy. At the beginning of 1959 U.S. companies
owned about 40 percent of the Cuban sugar lands - almost all the cattle
ranches - 90 percent of the mines and mineral concessions - 80 percent
of the utilities - and practically all the oil industry - and supplied
two-thirds of Cuba's imports.
Of course, our private investment did much
to help Cuba. But our action too often gave the impression that this country
was more interested in taking money from the Cuban people than in helping
them build a strong and diversified economy of their own.
The symbol of this shortsighted attitude is
now on display in a Havana museum. It is a solid gold telephone presented
to Batista by the American-owned Cuban telephone company. It is an expression
of gratitude for the excessive telephone rate increase which the Cuban
dictator had granted at the urging of our Government. But visitors to the
museum are reminded that America made no expression at all over the other
events which occurred on the same day this burdensome rate increase was
granted, when 40 Cubans lost their lives in an assault on Batista's palace.
The third, and perhaps most disastrous of
our failures, was the decision to give stature and support to one of the
most bloody and repressive dictatorships in the long history of Latin American
repression. Fulgencio Batista murdered 20,000 Cubans in 7 years - a greater
proportion of the Cuban population than the proportion of Americans who
died in both World Wars, and he turned democratic Cuba into a complete
police state - destroying every individual liberty.
Yet, our aid to his regime, and the ineptness
of our policies, enabled Batista to invoke the name of the United States
in support of his reign of terror.
Administration spokesmen publicly praised
Batista - hailed him as a stanch ally and a good friend - at a time when
Batista was murdering thousands, destroying the last vestiges of freedom,
and stealing hundreds of millions of dollars from the Cuban people, and
we failed to press for free elections.
In October 1958 just a few days before Batista
held a rigged and fraudulent election - Secretary of State Dulles was the
guest of honor at a reception held by the Batista Embassy in Washington.
The reception made only the social pages in Washington; but it made the
Havana--and it was used by Batista to show how America favored his rule.
We stepped up a constant stream of weapons
and munitions to Batista - justified in the name of hemispheric defense,
when, in fact, their only real use was to crush the dictator's opposition,
and even when the Cuban civil war was raging - until March of 1958 - the
administration continued to send arms to Batista which were turned against
the rebels - increasing anti-American feeling and helping to strengthen
the influence of the Communists. For example, in Santa Clara, Cuba, today
there is an exhibit commemorating the devastation of that city by Batista's
planes in December of 1958. The star item in that exhibit is a collection
of bomb fragments inscribed with a handshake and the words: "Mutual Defense
- made in U.S.A."
Even when our Government had finally stopped
sending arms, our military missions stayed to train Batista's soldiers
for the fight against the revolution - refusing to leave until Castro's
forces were actually in the streets of Havana.
Finally, while we were allowing Batista to
place us on the side of tyranny, we did nothing to persuade the people
of Cuba and Latin America that we wanted to be on the side of freedom.
In 1953 we eliminated all regular Spanish language broadcasts of the Voice
of America. Except for the 6 months of the Hungarian crisis we did not
beam a single continuous program to South America at any time in the critical
years between 1953 and 1960. And less than 500 students a year were brought
here from all Latin America during these years when our prestige was so
sharply dropping.
It is no wonder, in short, that during these
years of American indifference the Cuban people began to doubt the sincerity
of our dedication to democracy. They began to feel that we were more interested
in maintaining Batista than we were in maintaining freedom - that we were
more interested in protecting our investments than we were in protecting
their liberty - that we wanted to lead a crusade against communism abroad
but not against tyranny at home. Thus, it was our own policies - not Castro's
- that first began to turn our former good neighbors against us. And Fidel
Castro seized on this rising anti-American feeling, and exploited it, to
persuade the Cuban people that America was the enemy of democracy - until
the slogan of the revolution became "Cuba, Si, Yanqui, No" - and Soviet
imperialism had captured a movement which had originally sprung from the
ideals of our own American Revolution.
The great tragedy today is that we are repeating
many of the same mistakes throughout Latin America. The same grievances
- the same poverty and discontent and distrust of America which Castro
rode to power are smoldering in almost every Latin Nation.
For we have not only supported a dictatorship
in Cuba - we have propped up dictators in Venezuela, Argentina, Colombia,
Paraguay, and the Dominican Republic. We not only ignored poverty and distress
in Cuba - we have failed in the past 8 years to relieve poverty and distress
throughout the hemisphere. For despite the bleak poverty that grips nearly
all of Latin America - with an average income of less than $285 a year
- with an exploding population that threatens even this meager standard
of living - yet our aid programs have continued to concentrate on wasteful
military assistance until we made a sudden recognition of their needs for
development capital practically at the point of Mr. Castro's gun.
Today time is running out in Latin America.
Our once firm friends are drifting away. Our historic ties are straining
under our failure to understand their aspirations. And although the cold
war will not be won in Latin America, it could very well be lost there.
If we continue to repeat our past errors -
if we continue to care more for the support of regimes than the friendship
of people - if we continue to devote greater effort to the support of dictators
than to the fight against poverty and hunger - then rising discontent will
provide fertile ground for Castro and his Communist friends.
What can a new administration do to reverse
these trends? For the present Cuba is gone. Our policies of neglect and
indifference have let it slip behind the Iron Curtain - and for the present
no magic formula will bring it back. I have no basic disagreement with
the President's policies of recent months - for the time to save Cuba was
some time ago.
Hopefully, events may once again bring us
an opportunity to bring our influence strongly to bear on behalf of the
cause of freedom in Cuba. But in the meantime we can constantly express
our friendship for the Cuban people - our sympathy with their economic
problems - our determination that they will again be free. At the
same time we must firmly resist further Communist encroachment in this
hemisphere - working through a strengthened organization of the American
States - and encouraging those liberty-loving Cubans who are leading the
resistance to Castro. And we must make it clear to Mr. Castro once and
for all that we will defend our naval base at Guantanamo under all circumstances
- and continue to seek reparation for his seizures of American property.
But whatever we do in Cuba itself, ultimately
the road to freedom in Havana runs through Rio and Buenos Aires and Mexico
City. For if we are to halt the advance of Latin communism, we must create
a Latin America where freedom can flourish - where long enduring people
know, at last, that they are moving toward a better life for themselves
and their children - where steady economic advance is a framework for stable,
democratic Government - and where tyranny, isolated and despised, eventually
withers on the vine.
These are difficult problems - problems requiring
a program which I will soon discuss in a major address on Latin American
policy. But only if we extend the hand of American friendship in a common
effort to wipe out the poverty and discontent and hopelessness on which
communism feeds - only then will we drive back tyranny until it ultimately
perishes in the streets of Havana.
And, so tonight, I address myself not only
to the people of Ohio and the people of America, but also to the people
of Cuba. And to our friends - the Cuban people - I recall the scriptural
injunction: "Be of stout heart. Be not dismayed." The road ahead will not
be easy.
The perils and hardships will be many. But here
in America we pledge ourselves to raise high the light of freedom - until
it burns brightly from the Arctic to Cape Horn - and one day that light
will shine again.