Antonio Navalón
From 1850 to 1990, the history of Latin America was conditioned entirely by what was convenient, allowed, understood, and wanted by the United States of America. The Monroe Doctrine or -later the “Big Stick” policy promoted by Theodore Roosevelt – was an example of what the United States did and undid in Latin America. Whether it was for the gold, the casinos, the mines, or the oil, the Americans acted in the region, considering only their interests. What’s more, “America for the Americans” was a slogan invented by John Quincy Adams and attributed to President Monroe and was, among other things, a warning and a warning to make it clear that anyone seeking to intrude in his backyard would suffer the consequences. . All of this arose as a response to the revolution and the rising presence of Communism in the world, but above all to make it clear that they were the ones who ruled the region.
For much of the 19th century and most of the 20th century, the United States had great power and interference in Latin America. Through coups d’état orchestrated by US intelligence and special forces, the country with the flag of the stars and stripes was conquering more and more and shaping the southern part of the American continent to its liking. Although it is also true that it was thanks to this introversion of that abusive partner that the region could have an economic and infrastructural dynamism such as had not been seen before. It is enough to see infrastructures such as the Panama Canal to verify that without the interference and financial and logistical collaboration of the United States, this type of development would probably have been unthinkable or even unfeasible, not only for Panama but for any other Latin American country. With the participation in the design and execution by French engineers and with the American leadership that on August 15, 1914, the Panama Canal could be used for the first time, it became an essential structure for Latin American and world trade which continues to the present day.
America burns. Colombia, Peru, in many ways, Mexico; not long ago, Chile, Venezuela, Bolivia, and, now Cuba, are being overcome by significant social conflicts. In most cases, these conflicts are personified by violent demonstrations that take over their streets and are nothing more than a living representation of the claims and needs of their people.
In America, we were apparently prepared for anything. For everything except for the void and the hole that the fall of the system and the nation could leave that – despite how small and remote from the geopolitical game – since 1959 has been a player with different and as particular characteristics as it is Cuba. Regardless of who organized the demonstrations last weekend – although I fear that in Cuba, the protests are organized by hunger, deprivation, and the impatience of its people – this fact is already an important event in the country’s life. Just over fifty years after Fidel Castro came to power, Cubans continue to wait for success, no longer ideological or dialectical, but for success in the form of calories and comforts that will allow them to make life more bearable. They continue to hope that the revolution, historical reason, and symbols universally used and forged on the island – as in their time were Fidel Castro or Che Guevara – will finally serve them well.
In this era of hackers, in an age in which we are all so free, deep down, that same freedom makes us more conducive to the cliff, two elements may have come together that we cannot put aside. On the one hand, the objective reality of the system’s failure – at least because of the US strangulation and its inefficiencies in meeting the needs of its people – and, on the other hand, the inevitable rise and dominance of social media in our day.
On August 5, 1994 – five years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and after the collapse of the communist regime in the world, although except for China, which is the proof not only of what it means to survive a Communist Party but turn it into the axis of power – Cuba witnessed an unprecedented event. On the Malecón in Havana, Fidel Castro saw the most significant protest against his government since he came to power. With an increasingly weak economy, but, above all, with a great shortage of resources, the Cuban people took to the streets hungry and with the illusion of changing their reality that summer afternoon. To this, Castro did not react by making use of the army, but – using his great discursive ability and persuasion – faced his fellow nationals and urged them to “Winning the streets” and “defeating stateless persons,” in addition to accusing the US government as the cause of these riots.
On that occasion, Fidel Castro was able to channel discontent and contain it efficiently. Now – with the figure of the Castro brothers that gradually fades over time and with a President who has a bad product, since he is not in a position to satisfy the needs of his people – Cuba and its leader face a great challenge in your story. And it is that in addition to not having the charisma or capacity that the Castros had, President Miguel Díaz-Canel has to face the viability and impossibility of maintaining communist Cuba.
Per se, what is happening in Cuba is already a situation of historical relevance that moves the whole board since – after all – man needs dreams. As Shakespeare said, “We are such stuff as dreams are made on, and our little life is rounded with a sleep.” We must not fail to consider that, if it happened, the Cuba that would fall would no longer be the same that Fidel Castro built with so much dedication, repression, and effort. Cuba today is an entirely different nation than when it became the illusion of the ALBA countries, the one that inspired the unfinished and failed Chavista revolution or the one that promoted the utopian and impossible dream of Nestor Kirchner. At the time, Cuba was also the benchmark of anti-American dignity, and its position before the hegemonic power was a sign of political reference by itself. However, that Cuba no longer exists.
“We are such stuff as dreams are made on, and our little life is rounded with a sleep.” William Shakespeare
As America explodes, it is not clear which model will allow or guarantee Latin American success. Because where the model described by the Mexican President as “neoliberal” has triumphed, it is also evident that the failure of social differences and the absence of the distribution of wealth in Latin America has created levels of dissatisfaction and needs, which are what there are. For example, behind the protests, uprisings, and complexities of Colombian society, there is social dissatisfaction about how their country has been led. With its guerrillas still alive, behind-the-scenes wars have been constantly in Colombia with a failed peace process. Furthermore, we cannot fail to consider that just as Venezuela can suffer specific attacks on its border, it can also organize with the terrorist and guerrilla groups that take refuge in its territory certain social movements to destabilize Colombia.
Cuba has become the insufferable and intractable piece of the board. And it is not because of its military, economic or social success, areas in which it is clearly deficient, but because of everything it has historically and ideologically represented in the American continent. Castro will not only go down in history because of his revolutionary success but also because of his tremendous political agility. In 1994 he not only managed to disarm the protest that was organized against him but also at that time, he told all Cubans who were not happy with the result and with his life in revolutionary Cuba that they could leave the island swimming or walking on the waters. Finally, Castro fostered the habit of thinking about which part of the political equilibrium in America has always depended – in one way or another – on insurgent or terrorist coups arising from an always secret and silent negotiation between Cuba and the United States.
The dreams of our parents, as well as the dreams of those who on the streets of Paris asked the impossible to be more realistic, who wore a khaki uniform – that came from Cuba – represented the hope of an America that never happened and failed. Cuba was an ideological reference that today is only matched by the failure of the other America represented by another small country. A country where the market economy was a success but later – as it was seen not long ago – was overshadowed by a social failure, Chile’s case.
The exhaustion of ideologies, together with the operational failure of the different governments, gives a panorama where – except for dictatorships – the big question to ask is, from a socio-economic and political point of view, what will make the Americas viable? It is undeniable that, although most of the countries of America have been in a representative democracy for approximately thirty years, they have neither achieved the successes of the social union necessary to create progress nor have they managed to change unjust social structures. Structures that – crisis after crisis – continue to increase the number of inhabitants below the poverty line. The failure of the administrations, but, above all, the lack of intelligence on the part of the peoples to write the social agreement that allows them to have peace and development are the keys that – in my opinion – explain the reason for the outbreak and the present and latent fire that we are witnessing today in America that does not speak English.
We currently need an economic reference based not on social failure but on the success of equitable economic distribution, even as the basis for creating new and better opportunities. But, above all, we need to update the concepts of political freedom and representative democracy to move forward with a future that may be buried or hidden in the statements of what we would like to see happen but is not happening. And it is that, although we vote and have formal freedoms, the social deficit of America is so significant that it makes it a dangerous adventure, which is exploding in many places, and it is unknown when it will end.
