The Closest of Enemies; A Personal and Diplomatic Account of U.S.-Cuban Relations Since 1957: A Personal and Diplomatic History of U.S. Cuban Relation

.Advice to the Reader:First, read Philip Greenspan's review on Wayne Smith's book. Secondly, read Wayne Smith's book. Then, please read my book The Secret Fidel Castro: Deconstructing the Symbol. Reach your own conclusions.Servando González.

Shortly after Castro came to power the U.S. took a hard line against Cuba. To support that position it portrayed Castro as a tyrannical dictator who subjected his people to a repressive regime. The media, endorsing the government's hard line, has given the public a picture of Cuba to justify that policy."The Closest of Enemies" by Wayne S. Smith-a former officer in the State Department-gives a different perspective to that view. He describes some of the internal disputes that occurred over that hard line policy and shows us a Cuba at variance with what has been presented in the media. His tours of duty brought him to Cuba in 1957-59, during the period when Battista was overthrown and again from 1977-81, when he was chief of the U.S. interests section in Havana. The disagreements on foreign policy were not his alone. Many of the career foreign service officers felt that resolving differences through negotiation would be more productive. But both Democratic and Republican administrations-Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton--have followed the same uncompromising line.Even before Castro came to power an arbitrary policy was followed. When it was apparent that the Cubans were opposed to Battista the U.S. continued to support him. They could have backed a more moderate candidate instead but waited until it was too late and Castro was victorious. Their excuse-it would not be right to intervene in a foreign country and it would draw unfavorable criticism. However, in 1954, it did intervene to effect the removal of Jacobo Arbenz from Guatamala. The U.S. knew that Castro was not a communist. But he was opposed to the U.S. presence in Cuba, an attitude common among many Cubans. In spite of this, he was pragmatic and the differences that arose could have been resolved through negotiation. Instead, the U.S. was intransigent and drove him to the Soviets.Many hostile activities followed. The Bay of Pigs invasion was attempted on the assumption that it would cause the Cubans to rebel against him. It failed. The planners did not seek the advice of those in the State Dept who correctly saw that he was popular with the people and he continued to have their support. It exploited the plight of those dissidents who escaped by boat; but many anti-communists who had languished in prison and were now allowed to leave Cuba were denied visas to enter the U.S. It lied about various supposedly hostile Cuban activities in Central America.Smith returned to Havana in 1979 and described what he saw. There was no poverty and misery that exists in other Latin American countries. Everyone was provided with food, clothing, shelter, an education and medical care. I recently visited Cuba. It is over 20 years since he made that observation and an awful lot has happened in the interim. But I can attest that the same is true today.This book was published in 1987 before the Soviet government, a prop for the Cuban economy, collapsed. With that col

As a former Head of the US Interests Section (USIS) in Havana, Wayne Smith has not just lived the politics of Cuban - US relations, but has actually made some. After representing the US under President Carter in the tiny Caribbean dictatorship, a nation subject to tight US economic sanctions, Wayne Smith has come forward to speak about those sanctions. While he does not support the Cuban regime or its ideology in any way (neither do I), he believes that the embargo is strongly counter-productive, as it ends up helping Castro in his goal of resisting foreign influence and trends towards change. This is an argument most scholars agree with, and is surely not new. Yet, in this book Wayne Smith has been able to put forward the argument in a very particular light, from the point of view of someone who actually represented the embargo-enforcing nation for several years, and then had a sharp change in opinion. The book is extremely well written. As an academic study it is highly rigorous and extremely subjective: the author criticizes diverging views, but does not attack them just out of differences, and he manages to substantiate and argue his own views extremely well. The book is concise and clear, simple to read and even enjoyable. It is an absolute must for anyone approaching the delicate issue of Cuban - US relations in the current period.