Liberation from America: A look at Castro’s Approaches Essay

An important attribute that is shared by great leaders and dictators is their approach to governance of nations is objectivity. All great leaders that make it to books of history and affect lives of people years after they are gone have objectives that they set and seek to achieve in their reign or period of leadership. The same can be said of Fidel Castro who is guaranteed a place in the history of not just Cuba or Latin America but the entire world. His early history is filled with a number of revolution and the nationalists later became a President through the same approaches that define his early history.

The socialist has a special dislike for America and not just its Presidents but what he refers to as an imperialist approach that the nation employs in its development. In fact Cuba is among the few nations that implement a socialistic approach to governance in the Western hemisphere. The changes came about when Castro became prime minister and moved up the ranks to be the president. The socialistic policies go against American capitalistic theories and may have been a premeditated move by the dictator to ensure the development of a system of governance that is against the American systems n (Sweig 2002, 23).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Capitalism and socialism are at opposing sides and the dictatorial approaches that the employed experience is nothing like the democratic approaches that define the American approach to governance. Castro grew up in an age of violence and was involved in mass underground movements aimed at liberating Cuba out of tyranny and what he described as social injustice in his days at Havana University. As a practicing lawyer it came into his notice that many were opposed to the influence that America had on many nations internal affairs.

In fact, the key area of interest was the influence that America had on the internal affairs of Cuba. His relationship with Ernesto Guevara is considered to be one of the key factors that defined his violent approaches to revolution (Sweig 2002, 35). When the first government that Castro was active in got into power and started expropriating land Castro vehemently claimed that he was not a communist and proved his point by stating that they like America opposed communism. Castro was refused a meeting with the US president and went ahead and met with soviet leaders in the height of the cold war.

In the 1960s, Castro signed a deal with the USSR and when US companies based in Cuba refused to refine the oil they were expropriated (Leonard 2004, 81). Decision making under Castro was in no way influenced by the Americans and the USSR supported its military and economy by providing aid. His attitude which was developed by past experiences of a corrupt America influenced Cuban government is cited by many as being behind his approach to foreign policy defined by reduced contact with Americans. His socialistic roots that can be traced back to his university days just served to ignite his hate for America.

When Eisenhower reduced import quotas in sugar by about 7 million tons Cuba respondent by nationalizing US properties and businesses (Leonard 2004, 68). Communism flourished under Castro and anti Castro protests funded by US administrators became common in Florida. The placement of missiles by the USSR in Cuba in what they termed as being a counter move to the placement of the same by the US in Turkey threatened to lead to a third world war. Castro’s greatest strength was the embargo which effectively cut any relationship with the US. After the collapse of the USSR, the dollar was legalized as Cuba turned to tourism.

Castro’s effort to keep the US off his business led to his rejection of aid to Cuba though he accepted shipment of food from the US in trade relations. The levels of success that Castro managed to isolate the US from its business equal the levels of success that he attained in depending on the USSR (Gott 2004, 43). He constantly referred to capitalist nations as being imperialistic and fascist. His influence on leaders and nations that were close to Cuba was the other approach that fascist leaders used to threaten the developments that were being made by Western nations in promoting capitalism.

His resistance of the US is seen as a deep belief in the effects that capitalism has on the poor and those that are in no position to harness opportunities. He is quoted as having that weapons that are being piled by wealthy nations can be used to kill the poor and yet the same cannot be directed towards the development of poor societies due to the capitalist philosophy that such nations adopt. He fought for a communist cause at whatever cost and in his reign it is estimated that over 14000 Cuban died in military action in far countries for the cause of communism (Castro, Ramonet, ; Hurley 2004, 34).

In a summit of 16 Caribbean nations in 1998, he stated that cooperation between Caribbean nations will prevent their being dominated by rich nations (Castro, Ramonet, ; Hurley 2004, 35). Some nations appear to have embraced Castro’s philosophy and the US has found itself being blamed for breaking promises. Castro who was once considered an outcast accused the Mexicans of being brain washed culturally by the US they may soon remember Disney land characters than their history. In summary, Castro’s battle has been a war of socialism against capitalism that the US represents.