Pedro von Eyken for Poder & Dinero and FinGurú
In light of the recent presidential election results in Venezuela, it is worth keeping in mind some data and background on Cuba. Starting in the 21st century, with Hugo Chávez's rise to power in Venezuela, succeeded by Nicolás Maduro in 2013, Bolívar's country has become a colony of the metropolis based in Havana. This symbiotic relationship between the two countries has been more convenient for Cuba, which provides its dominant intelligence apparatus and the ideological soft power of its Revolution, than for Venezuela, a generous contributor to its metropolis with oil and other economic resources. Fortunately, today's Cuban economic disaster did not entirely take hold in current Venezuela, despite its extreme severity.
Since the 1990s, Fidel Castro created the so-called 21st Century Socialism, a precursor and synonym of the São Paulo Forum, when he admitted that it was no longer the time for armed revolutions like his own, which triumphed in 1959 and which he promoted in Latin America between 1960 and 1980, but that power could be achieved through pluralist elections. Of course, from then on, the leaders had to stay in power indefinitely, regardless of the methods. Venezuela was the first successful case, and since then, with varying luck, Nicaragua and Bolivia have followed.
In April 2021, I defended a doctoral thesis in political science at the Argentine Catholic University, under the direction of Dr. Juan Gabriel Tokatlian, from the Torcuato Di Tella University, titled The Cuban Revolution 50 Years Later: Impact of External and Internal Factors on Cuba's Economic and Social Situation in 2009[1]. In this academic work, I start from my testimonial experience of a three-year stay as a diplomat in Cuba (2006-2009), traveling throughout the island and talking with many Cubans inside and outside the country. After six years of research, I consider that I have proven my hypothesis that internal factors (the erroneous and contradictory economic policies of Fidel Castro and his successors over 50 years) had a much greater impact than external factors (the American embargo since 1962 and the implosion of the USSR in 1991) on the serious economic and social situation in which Cuba found itself in the 50th anniversary year of the Revolution, 2009, when I left the island. Despite the title, the thesis contains, at the end, an update to 2019. A year after defending the doctoral thesis, in 2022, I published in Buenos Aires the book Witness to a Betrayed Revolution, by Dunken publishing house, which constitutes an abridged version aimed at the general public, without the academic and methodological rigor of the doctoral work.
In the book, I aim to demonstrate, above all, the following:
· The revolution was betrayed for two reasons:
1°) Its leader, during the armed struggle in the Sierra Maestra and the first two years of government, carefully omitted to recognize his true purpose of establishing the Marxist-Leninist political-economic system in the country. He used the invasion of Cuban exiles in the Bay of Pigs in 1961 to justify the system change, which had been clearly evident for some time.
2°) For thirty years, between 1961 and 1991, with the Soviet implosion following the fall of the Berlin Wall, Cuba was more dependent on the USSR than it had been on the United States until 1959, in the economic, strategic, and military spheres. That dependence, especially in the economic area, was disastrous for Cuba and today presents alarming levels of food and energy shortages, coupled with increasing structural deficiencies.
· The Cuban leadership, after Fidel Castro's abandonment of power in 2006 and his death, which occurred ten years later, has not taken any concrete and continued steps to alleviate a strict Marxist-Leninist orthodoxy in favor of a market economy. A chapter of the book (and also of the doctoral thesis) is precisely dedicated to comparing Cuba's economic evolution with that of Vietnam: both countries still maintain political Marxism-Leninism. However, while the Asian country, before 1991, introduced a market economy, the Caribbean island remains strictly attached to the same rigidity from the beginning. This has caused more damage to its economy than the embargo (misnamed blockade) imposed by the U.S. in 1962, aggravated by the Soviet implosion in 1991. The differences between both countries are evident.
Dr. Pedro von Eyken
*Political Scientist and Diplomat
Bachelor and Doctorate in Political Science from the Argentine Catholic University. Diplomatic career 1983-2022. Foreign assignments: Consul in Hamburg (1986-1991); Political Advisor at the embassy in Germany (1993-1998); Plenipotentiary Minister and Chargé d'Affaires in Cuba (2006-2009); Plenipotentiary Minister and Chargé d'Affaires in Finland (2009-2012); Ambassador to Haiti (2017-2019). Author of the book "Witness to a Betrayed Revolution" (Buenos Aires, Dunken, 2022). Columnist for the newspaper "La Prensa" of Buenos Aires and other oral and written media. President of the Rotary Club del Río de la Plata 2023-2024.
[1] Digital repository of UCA, link: https://repositorio.uca.edu.ar/handle/123456789/11539?locale=en
Comments