DOCSLIB.ORG

Nicaragua: Before and After the Revolution Laura M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nicaragua: Before and After the Revolution Laura M Southern Illinois University Carbondale OpenSIUC Honors Theses University Honors Program 5-1992 Nicaragua: Before and After the Revolution Laura M. Zaremba Follow this and additional works at: http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/uhp_theses Recommended Citation Zaremba, Laura M., "Nicaragua: Before and After the Revolution" (1992). Honors Theses. Paper 21. This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the University Honors Program at OpenSIUC. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of OpenSIUC. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY 'AT CARBONDALE NICARAGUA: BEFORE AND AFTER THE REVOLUTION A SENIOR THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY HONORS PROGRAM TO FULFILL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR GRADUATION WITH UNIVERSITY HONORS DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE BY LAURA ZAREMBA CARBONDALE, ILLINOIS MAY, 1992 TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 1 Brief History of Nicaragua, 1933 - Present 2. PRE-REVOLUTION NICARAGUA THROUGH 1979 9 Social Climate Economic Climate Political Climate 3. NICARAGUA UNDER THE SANDINISTAS 26 Social Conditions and Policy Economic Conditions and Policy Political Conditions and Policy 4. CONCLUSION: THE SANDINISTA FAILURE AND THE FUTURE OF NICARAGUA 53 Foreign Policy and the Contra War Legacy of Monocultural Economics and Dependency 1990 Elections and Violeta Chamorro ENDNOTE S ..........................•...................... 58 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............•................................ 65 PROPOSAL The victorious Sandinistas and their governing junta stood on the threshold of a Nicaragua eager to be transformed form the exploited, dependent, and terribly poor nation-state it had been virturally since its independence from Spain into a truly new society based on popular will and welfare. After a decade of governing with this goal in sight, however, the Sandinista government led by President Daniel Ortega was defeated in the 1990 elections. I will examine this electoral defeat as the last in a series of setbacks that prevented a revolutionary society from emerging. I will attempt to demonstrate how it was that despite the overwhelming support of the Nicaraguan people, substantial foreign assistance, and a clear policy agenda, the Sandinistas failed. I will also attempt to explain that failure as a result of their inability to withstand a sustained armed civil conflict, and of their inability to diversify their monoclutural economic system to break their historic pattern of dependency. INTRODUCTION: A BRIEF HISTORY OF NICARAGUA, 1933 - PRESENT The United States Marines occupied Nicaragua almost continuously from 1912 to 1933. In order to insure the continued internal stability of the small, agrarian' country, they left in their place the commander of the U. S. -trained National Guard, Anastasio Somoza Garc{a. 1 His authoritarian rule would continue until his assassination in 1956, followed by another, more brutal dictatorship under his son, Anastasio Somoza Debayle. It was under his regime that the leftist opposition born in Nicaragua's countryside evolved into the revolutionary movement known as the Sandinistas. Deriving their ideological foundations from both the Cuban revolution and from the 1 popular revolutionary leader, Augusto Ces~r Sandino, the Sandinista movement gradually gained wide support among the vast majority of Nicaragua's large agrarian population and urban workers throughout the 1960's and 70's. Following a huge mobilization of the revolutionary forces, the Frente Sandinista de Liberaci6n Nacional (FSLN) finally took power in 1979, forcing Somoza to flee the country. The decade that followed was, in large part, the result of the FSLN's attempt to produce a total social and political revolution consistent with their vision of a more equitable Nicaraguan society. The new marxist government instituted sweeping reforms in the economy and the government, and pursued aggressive policies to attack a number of the nation's serious social and economic problems. After ten years under the revolutionary regime, however, Nicaragua remained plagued by many of the same problems that had inspired the armed opposition against Somoza. The FSLN was, in fact, defeated in the elections of 1990 and replaced by the more centrist government of Violetta Chamorro, a long-time leader of the opposition to the revolutionary government. Her administration, however, faces most of the same challenges the Sandinista government unsuccessfully confronted. The Somozas The u.S. hoped to accomplish three objectives in establishing the National Guard: to replace Nicaragua's old army and police with a central, well-trained and well-equipped military force; to establish internal order; and to make the military a non-political force with the task of preserving a constitutional government and free elections. 2 Although the second objective was by far the most vital to U. S. policymakers, the third is particularly ironic in that the Guard became perhaps the most politicized entity in 2 Nicaragua throughout both the Somoza regimes. The installation of Somoza in 1933 marked the beginning of a long and violent family dynasty, committed only to enhancing and preserving the power of the Somozas through unprecedented oppression and corruption. 3 After the 1932 elections, supervised by occupying U. S. forces, Somoza Garda was named to the post of Jefe Director of the National Guard, which had quickly evolved into the most capable army Nicaragua had ever had. Somoza would soon utilize its forces as his personal instrument of domestic political oppression. 4 By February of 1934, he had already ordered the assassination of Sandino, thus eliminating the largest obstacle to his recent ascension to power. Though there are conflicting accounts and interpretations concerning Sandino's assassination, Somoza--whether reluctantly or with great conviction, ordered the murder to be carried out by members of the National Guard. By 1937, Somoza Garc{a had been officially inaugurated as the President of Nicaragua, thus beginning a forty-two year era of authoritarian rule and tyranny. During his first term, Somoza began consolidating his power and increasing his own wealth at the expense of the national treasury and the nation's poor. His personal holdings, which soon reached into both the industrial and agrarian sectors, combined with his influence over the command of the Guardia formed an immensely profitable personal network between the government, the economy, and the military. 5 The President was also able to recognize and take full advantage of the shift in U. S. - Nicaraguan policy to one of non-intervention. The reluctance of the Truman administration to interfere with the Somoza inner circle facilitated his ascension to, and consolidation of supreme political and economic power. When his term as President was due to expire in 1947, Somoza selected Leonardo ArgUello to be his successor on the Liberal Party ticket. Following 3 a fraudulent election administered and overseen by the National Guard, Argiiello was installed as President. Determined to assert his authority and prove he was no puppet, however, Argiiello tried to make staff changes among the Guard officers without notifying Somoza. Less than one month later, he was deposed and replaced by the dictator, thus establishing a pattern of illegal succession that would characterize Somoza rule in the years ahead. B Such an overtly anti-democratic maneuver, however, left 'the U.S. government no choice but to withhold diplomatic recognition until 1948, when it recognized the government of Somoza's uncle, Victor Manuel RomB:n y Reyes. Consistent with the trend of the previous decade, Somoza again assumed the presidency when Ro~n y Reyes died in May 1950, less than one year after giving up the post. 7 The dictator moved swiftly to insure the continuation of his rule, seeking renewed military aid from the U. S. in 1951. By 1953, Nicaragua had negotiated such an agreement with the U.S. whose policymakers had been convinced that Communists in Guatemala and Costa Rica posed a serious threat to Central American security. Somoza Garc{a skillfully used his strategic position to gain special military, economic, and political concessions from the U. S. government, and carefully maintained close personal relationships with key members of the State Department until his assassination in 1956. Luis Somoza, who was the President of the Nicaraguan Congress, assumed the presidency upon his father's death and appointed his younger brother, Anastasio Somoza Debayle as commander of the National Guard and of the Air Force. B The two brothers would continue to rule what had become their personal fiefdom until Luis' death in 1967, by which time the younger Somoza had simultaneously achieved the presidency and command of 4 the Guard. 9 The worst corruption and brutality of the Somoza period then began to characterize the socio-political system. Somoza Debayle was determined to remain in power and to retain his position of wealth. He maintained both through blatant fraud and literal elimination of any political opposition via the National Guard. Like his father, "Tachito" carefully cultivated personal relationships with U. S. officials. Despite the atrocities of his government, he was ever-mindful of maintaining the friendship of the Unites States, and in particular, the State Department.'o The 1970s, however, proved to be a decade of change in Nicaragua that would finally bring
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ortega for President: the Religious Rebirth of Sandinismo in Nicaragua
    European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 89, October 2010 | 47-63 Ortega for President: The Religious Rebirth of Sandinismo in Nicaragua Henri Gooren Abstract: This article analyses various connections between Daniel Ortega’s surprising victory in the presidential elections of 5 November 2006, his control of the Frente Sandinista de la Liberación Nacio- nal (FSLN) party, and the changing religious context in Nicaragua, where Pentecostal churches now claim almost one quarter of the population. To achieve this, I draw from my fieldwork in Nicaragua in 2005 and 2006, which analysed competition for members between various religious groups in Managua: charismatic Catholics, the Assemblies of God, the neo-Pentecostal mega-church Hosanna, and the Mormon Church. How did Ortega manage to win the votes from so many religious people (evangelical Protestants and Roman Catholics alike)? And how does this case compare to similar cases of populist leaders in Latin America courting evangelicals, like Chávez in Venezuela and earlier Fujimori in Peru? Keywords: Nicaragua, religion, elections, FSLN, Daniel Ortega. Populist leadership and evangelical support in Latin America At first look, the case of Ortega’s surprise election victory seems to fit an estab- lished pattern in Latin America: the populist leader who comes to power in part by courting – and winning – the evangelical vote. Alberto Fujimori in Peru was the first to achieve this in the early 1990s, followed by Venezuelan lieutenant-colonel Hugo Chávez in the late 1990s and more recently Rafael Correa in Ecuador (Op- penheimer 2006). These three populist leaders came to power thanks to the break- down of an old party system, which gradually became stagnant and corrupted.
    [Show full text]
  • The Carter Center News Spring 1990
    THE CARTER CENTER NEWS SPRING 1990 Carter, Council Monitor Nicaraguan Elections Peaceful Transition of Power First in Country's History On April 25, the Nicaraguan people inaugurated a new president in the first peaceful transfer of power to an elected opposition in the country's history. of Nicaragua chose their new president in a free and fair election," said President Carter, who led an international delegation to monitor the February 25 elections. The delegation was formed under the auspices of the Council of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, chaired by President Carter and based at The Carter Center of Emory University (CCEU). The Council joined delegations from the United Nations and the Organization of American States (OAS) in monitoring the elections. Following the transfer of power from the Sandinista (FSLN) government of Daniel Ortega to the coalition government (UNO) of Violeta Chamorro, President Carter said, "Both Daniel Ortega and Violeta Chamorro deserve the world's respect and admiration for the way they handled the transition. Former President Ortega has set his country on the road to democracy. President Chamorro has been entrusted by the people of Nicaragua with the difficult task of healing the division in that nation and nurturing the newly-born democratic spirit. It is my sincerest hope that peace and democracy will flourish in Nicaragua." The Invitation In the summer of 1989, President Carter and the Council were invited to observe the elections by thenPresident Daniel Ortega, the Union of National Opposition (UNO), and the Supreme Electoral Council. The Nicaraguan election project was directed by Robert Pastor and Jennie Lincoln, director and associate director respectively of CCEU's Latin American and Caribbean Studies program.
    [Show full text]
  • William Chislett
    ANTI-AMERICANISM IN SPAIN: THE WEIGHT OF HISTORY William Chislett Working Paper (WP) 47/2005 18/11/2005 Area: US-Transatlantic Dialogue – WP Nº 47/2005 18/11/2005 Anti-Americanism in Spain: The Weight of History William Chislett ∗ Summary: Spain’s feelings toward the United States are the coldest in Europe after Turkey, according to a poll by the German Marshall Fund. And they have been that way for a very long time. The country’s thermometer reading on a scale of 0-100 was 42º in 2005, only surpassed by Turkey’s 28º and compared with an average of 50º for the 10 countries surveyed (see Figure 1). The same degree of coldness towards the United States was brought out in the 16-country Pew Global Attitudes Project where only 41% of Spaniards said they had a very or somewhat favourable view of the United States. This surprises many people. After all, Spain has become a vibrant democracy and a successful market economy since the right-wing dictatorship of General Franco ended in 1975 with the death of the Generalísimo. Why are Spaniards so cool towards the United States? Spain’s feelings toward the United States are the coldest in Europe after Turkey, according to a poll by the German Marshall Fund. And they have been that way for a very long time. The country’s thermometer reading on a scale of 0-100 was 42º in 2005, only surpassed by Turkey’s 28º and compared with an average of 50º for the 10 countries surveyed (see Figure 1).
    [Show full text]
  • The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003
    THE REGIME CHANGE CONSENSUS: IRAQ IN AMERICAN POLITICS, 1990-2003 Joseph Stieb A dissertation submitted to the faculty at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of History in the College of Arts and Sciences. Chapel Hill 2019 Approved by: Wayne Lee Michael Morgan Benjamin Waterhouse Daniel Bolger Hal Brands ©2019 Joseph David Stieb ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ii ABSTRACT Joseph David Stieb: The Regime Change Consensus: Iraq in American Politics, 1990-2003 (Under the direction of Wayne Lee) This study examines the containment policy that the United States and its allies imposed on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War and argues for a new understanding of why the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. At the core of this story is a political puzzle: Why did a largely successful policy that mostly stripped Iraq of its unconventional weapons lose support in American politics to the point that the policy itself became less effective? I argue that, within intellectual and policymaking circles, a claim steadily emerged that the only solution to the Iraqi threat was regime change and democratization. While this “regime change consensus” was not part of the original containment policy, a cohort of intellectuals and policymakers assembled political support for the idea that Saddam’s personality and the totalitarian nature of the Baathist regime made Iraq uniquely immune to “management” strategies like containment. The entrenchment of this consensus before 9/11 helps explain why so many politicians, policymakers, and intellectuals rejected containment after 9/11 and embraced regime change and invasion.
    [Show full text]
  • Mutual Integration Versus Forced Assimilation
    Mutual Integration Versus Forced Assimilation: The Conflict between Sandinistas and Miskitu Indians, 1979-1987 by Jordan Taylor Towne An honors thesis submitted to the Honors Committee of The University of Colorado at Boulder Spring 2013 Abstract: This study aims to i) disentangle the white man’s overt tendency of denigrating indigenous agency to ethnic identity and, through the narrative of the Miskitu people of Nicaragua’s Atlantic Coast, display that this frequent ethnic categorization oversimplifies a complex cultural identity; ii) bring to the fore the heterogeneity inherent to even the most seemingly unanimous ethnic groups; iii) illustrate the influence of contingent events in shaping the course of history; and iv) demonstrate that without individuals, history would be nonexistent—in other words, individuals matter. Through relaying the story of the Miskitu Indians in their violent resistance against the Revolutionary Sandinistas, I respond contrarily to some of the relevant literature’s widely held assumptions regarding Miskitu homogeneity, aspirations, and identity. This is achieved through chronicling the period leading to war, the conflict itself, and the long return to peace and respectively analyzing the Miskitu reasons for collective resistance, their motives in supporting either side of the fragmented leadership, and their ultimate decision to lay down arms. It argues that ethnic identity played a minimal role in escalating the Miskitu resistance, that the broader movement did not always align ideologically with its representative bodies throughout, and that the Miskitu proved more heterogeneous as a group than typically accredited. Accordingly, specific, and often contingent events provided all the necessary ideological premises for the Miskitu call to arms by threatening their culture and autonomy—the indispensible facets of their willingness to comply with the central government—thus prompting a non-revolutionary grassroots movement which aimed at assuring the ability to join the revolution on their own terms.
    [Show full text]
  • PRSP Honduras Nicaragua
    The Impact of Poverty Reduction Strategies on the Rural Sector in Honduras and Nicaragua Study carried out by Trócaire for the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) Prepared by Jennifer Cornally (PRSP Officer - Trócaire Central America) Tom Crowley (Independent Consultant - Honduras) Sally O'Neill (Regional Director - Trócaire Central America) Translation by Mathieu Deprez Final Draft, Tegucigalpa, May 2004 Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the various actors from government, civil society and the international community interviewed during the course of this study for their time and valuable insights into the PRSP process in Honduras and Nicaragua. Thanks are also due to Yolanda Rodriguez for her support in carrying out primary and secondary research in Nicaragua. 2 Abbreviations ACI International Cooperation Agencies (Non-governmental) AECI Spanish Agency for International Cooperation AMHON Association of Municipalities of Honduras AMULEON Association of Municipalities of León Norte AMUNIC Association of Municipalities of Nicaragua ASONOG Association of Non-Governmental Organisations (Honduras) CAFTA Central American Free Trade Agreement CCER Civil Coordinator for the Emergency and Reconstruction COCOCH Coordinating Committee of Peasant Organisations in Honduras CODA Agricultural Development Advisory Board CODED Departmental Development Committee CODEL Local Development Committee CODEM Municipal Development Committee COFEMUN Feminist Network of University Women CONPES National Council for Economic and
    [Show full text]
  • Central America (Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua): Patterns of Human Rights Violations
    writenet is a network of researchers and writers on human rights, forced migration, ethnic and political conflict WRITENET writenet is the resource base of practical management (uk) independent analysis e-mail: [email protected] CENTRAL AMERICA (GUATEMALA, EL SALVADOR, HONDURAS, NICARAGUA): PATTERNS OF HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS A Writenet Report by Beatriz Manz (University of California, Berkeley) commissioned by United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Status Determination and Protection Information Section (DIPS) August 2008 Caveat: Writenet papers are prepared mainly on the basis of publicly available information, analysis and comment. All sources are cited. The papers are not, and do not purport to be, either exhaustive with regard to conditions in the country surveyed, or conclusive as to the merits of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum. The views expressed in the paper are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Writenet or UNHCR. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms ................................................................................................... i Executive Summary ................................................................................ iii 1 Introduction........................................................................................1 1.1 Regional Historical Background ................................................................1 1.2 Regional Contemporary Background........................................................2 1.3 Contextualized Regional Gang Violence....................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 32 Sec 3 End of the Cold War Section___Focus Question
    Name ______________________ Date ___________ Chapter 32 Sec 3 End of the Cold War Section__________ Focus Question: What were Reaganʼs foreign policies and how did they contribute to the fall of communism in Europe? President Reagan believed that Peace would come through strength rather than the policy of détente. He also believed that the US had to challenge communism to weaken it. How would he do this? 1. Build up military-new nuclear weapons 2. Support and aid anti-communists around the world A. Reagan builds up the military. 1. largest peacetime military build up 2. Billions of dollars to development and productions of new weapons, B1, B-2 bombers, MX missile system 3. Reagan knew the economy of Soviet Union could not support massive military build up 4. Strategic Defense Initiative/Star Wars—land and space lasers would destroy any missile aimed at US before it hit its target B. Reagan aids and supports anti-communists around the world 1. Afghanistan --- 1979 Soviet Union invades Afghanistan US funded and trained the Mujahadeen (guerilla forces on holy mission for Allah). Soviets begin to pull out 1988 2. Grenada --- small island nation in Caribbean Government taken over by radicals aided by Cuba US invades to keep Granada from becoming Communist outpost and to help Medical students there. 3. El Salvador --- US supports a right wing (less government control of people) government. Congress said the government there “rotten” and US should not aid. Decided aid dependent on government making progress with human rights 4. Nicaragua --- New Government, Sandanistas in control, socialist form of govt.
    [Show full text]
  • Central America and the Bitter Fruit of U.S. Policy by Bill Gentile
    CLALS WORKING PAPER SERIES | NO. 23 Central America and the Bitter Fruit of U.S. Policy by Bill Gentile OCTOBER 2019 Pullquote Bill Gentile in Nicaragua in the mid-1980s / Courtesy Bill Gentile Bill Gentile is a Senior Professorial Lecturer and Journalist in Residence at American University’s School of Communication. An independent journalist and documentary filmmaker whose career spans four decades, five continents, and nearly every facet of journalism and mass communication, he is the winner of two national Emmy Awards and was nominated for two others. He is a pioneer of “backpack video journalism” and the director, executive producer, and host of the documentary series FREELANCERS with Bill Gentile. He teaches Photojournalism, Foreign Correspondence, and Backpack Documentary. TheCenter for Latin American & Latino Studies (CLALS) at American University, established in January 2010, is a campus- wide initiative advancing and disseminating state-of-the-art research. The Center’s faculty affiliates and partners are at the forefront of efforts to understand economic development, democratic governance, cultural diversity and change, peace and diplomacy, health, education, and environmental well-being. CLALS generates high-quality, timely analysis on these and other issues in partnership with researchers and practitioners from AU and beyond. A previous version of this piece was published by the Daily Beast as a series, available here. Cover photo: Courtesy Bill Gentile 2 AU CENTER FOR LATIN AMERIcaN & LATINO STUDIES | CHAPTER TITLE HERE Contents
    [Show full text]
  • Nicaragua: in Brief
    Nicaragua: In Brief Maureen Taft-Morales Specialist in Latin American Affairs September 14, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R44560 Nicaragua: In Brief Summary This report discusses Nicaragua’s current politics, economic development and relations with the United States and provides context for Nicaragua’s controversial November 6, 2016, elections. After its civil war ended, Nicaragua began to establish a democratic government in the early 1990s. Its institutions remained weak, however, and they have become increasingly politicized since the late 1990s. Current President Daniel Ortega was a Sandinista (Frente Sandinista de Liberacion Nacional, FSLN) leader when the Sandinistas overthrew the dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza in 1979. Ortega was elected president in 1984. An electorate weary of war between the government and U.S.-backed contras denied him reelection in 1990. After three failed attempts, he won reelection in 2006, and again in 2011. He is expected to win a third term in November 2016 presidential elections. As in local, municipal, and national elections in recent years, the legitimacy of this election process is in question, especially after Ortega declared that no domestic or international observers would be allowed to monitor the elections and an opposition coalition was effectively barred from running in the 2016 elections. As a leader of the opposition in the legislature from 1990 to 2006, and as president since then, Ortega slowly consolidated Sandinista—and personal—control over Nicaraguan institutions. As Ortega has gained power, he reputedly has become one of the country’s wealthiest men. His family’s wealth and influence have grown as well, inviting comparisons to the Somoza family dictatorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Volcano – a Curriculum on Nicaragua
    Inside the Volcano: A Curriculum on Nicaragua Edited by William Bigelow and Jeff Edmundson Network of Educators on the Americas (NECA) P.O. Box 73038 Washington, DC 20056-3038 Network of Educators' Committees on Central America Washington, D.C. About the readings: We are grateful to the Institute for Food and Development Policy for permission to reproduce Imagine You Were A Nicaraguan (from Nicaragua: What Difference Could A Revolution Make?), Nicaragua: Give Change a Chance, The Plastic Kid (from Now We Can Speak) and Gringos and Contras on Our Land (from Don’t Be Afraid, Gringo). Excerpt from Nicaragua: The People Speak © 1985 Bergin and Garvey printed with permission from Greenwood Press. About the artwork: The pictures by Rini Templeton (pages 12, 24, 26, 29, 30, 31, 38, 57 60, 61, 66, 74, 75, 86, 87 90, 91. 101, 112, and the cover) are used with the cooperation of the Rini Templeton Memorial Fund and can be found in the beautiful, bilingual collection of over 500 illustrations entitled El Arte de Rini Templeton: Donde hay vida y lucha - The Art of Rini Templeton: Where there is life and struggle, 1989, WA: The Real Comet Press. See Appendix A for ordering information. The drawing on page 15 is by Nicaraguan artist Donald Navas. The Nicaraguan Cultural Alliance has the original pen and ink and others for sale. See Appendix A for address. The illustrations on pages 31, 32 and 52 are by Nicaraguan artist Leonicio Saenz. An artist of considerable acclaim in Central America, Saenz is a frequent contributor to Nicar&uac, a monthly publication of the Nicaraguan Ministry of Culture.
    [Show full text]
  • Revolutions, Coups, and Regrets/ U.S. Intervention in Latin America
    University of Hawai‘i at Hilo HOHONU 2019 Vol. 17 in general was complex and changed rapidly as events Revolutions, Coups, and unfolded. The revolution is perceived in the modern eye Regrets: as simplistic and the motivations obvious. However, that viewpoint reveals a lack of understanding of the Cuban U.S. Intervention in Latin Revolution and the subsequent political quagmire. What follows will display this Cuban quagmire in all of its America during the Cold War. complexities. Paul Edward Fontenot The government of Fulgencio Batista emerged From the Monroe Doctrine to the construction of in Cuba after a coup in 1952. Only seven years later the Panama Canal, the United States has been involved however, revolutionary forces under Fidel Castro in many of the most important events in Latin America, overthrew the authoritarian and oppressive Batista and the history of Latin America is closely tied to that of regime. The insurgency against Batista developed a the United States. With the relation that Latin America reputation inside and outside of Cuba as freedom currently shares with the U.S. in mind, one would not fighters resisted the repressive Batista regime. Batista’s find it shocking that the United States intervened all allies declined as the insurgency gained more ground over Latin America during the Cold War. The United and defeat loomed. Even the United States had all but States rigged the elections in numerous Latin American abandoned him by 1958. The Eisenhower administration countries, assassinated political figures in others, and did not want to openly support Castro nor openly even toppled governments all in the name of preventing condemn Batista, but they knew a losing horse when the spread of Communism or protecting their economic they saw one.
    [Show full text]