The
piggy bank was rattled again. In September 2021, the United States
Agency for International Development (USAID) gave
$6,669,000
in grants for projects aimed at “regime change” in Cuba,
a euphemism to avoid saying “direct intervention by a foreign
power.” The United States’ current Democratic
administration has especially favored the International Republican
Institute (IRI) with a bipartisan generosity that Donald Trump never
had. Other groups in Miami, Washington and Madrid that have also
received generous amounts have been among those calling for an
invasion of the island. These groups paint an apocalyptic panorama in
Havana to secure greater funding next year.
Public
funding for the anti-Castro industry in the United States seems
inexhaustible. In the last year, at least 54 organizations have
benefited
from the State Department, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)
and USAID programs for Cuba. In the last 20 years, this agency has
given
Creative Associates International, a CIA front, more than $1.8
billion for espionage, propaganda and the recruitment of agents of
“change” including on the island. One of its best-known
projects, the so-called “Cuban Twitter” or ZunZuneo,
resulted in a superb failure that unveiled a plot of corruption and
flagrant violations of U.S. law. ZunZuneo cost the USAID director his
job, but Creative Associates International continues to operate, only
now undercover.
The
American researcher Tracey Eaton, who for years has followed the
route of these funds, commented
in a recent interview that many of the financing programs for “regime
change” in Cuba are so stealthy that we will probably never
know who all the recipients are or what the total amount is, and
judging by the known millions, the subsidy must reach an even greater
figure. According to letters from the State Department and USAID that
Eaton has received, “democracy-building” strategies are
considered
“trade secrets” and are exempt from disclosure under the
U.S. Freedom of Information Act.
The
United States goes berserk at the alleged hint of Russian, Chinese or
Islamic intrusion into local politics and online platforms. However,
it does not hesitate for a minute to rudely intervene in Cuba, as
exposed
by the digital daily MintPress News, which documented how private
Facebook groups instigated the July 11 riots in several Cuban cities.
“The involvement of foreign nationals in the domestic affairs
of Cuba is on a level that can scarcely be conceived of in the United
States,” says the publication, adding: “the people who
sparked the July 11 protests in Cuba are planning similar actions for
October and November.”
The
United States is a military superpower whose plans for political
subversion are a shame and a scandal, and there is no indication that
Washington will now achieve what it has failed to do in 60 years. In
fact, the U.S. government’s obsession with Cuba is two
centuries old, as Louis A. Pérez, a historian at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, has shown
in a brilliant essay entitled “Cuba as an Obsessive Compulsive
Disorder.”
“The
subject of Cuba has rarely been a topic of reasoned disquisition. It
defies facile explanation, and certainly cannot be understood
solely—or even principally—within the logic of the policy
calculus that otherwise serves to inform U.S. foreign relations,
mostly because it is not logical,” writes the historian.
What
does make sense is the permanence in time of Cuban “intransigence.”
Ernesto Che Guevara used to repeat in his speeches in the first years
of the 1959 revolution that “Cuba will not be another
Guatemala.” In other words, its independence from the U.S.
empire could not be boycotted with media bombings first, induced
mobilizations and military attacks later.
The
custom of overthrowing independent alternatives is so long and the
arrogance by an overwhelming military and media force is so blind
that the U.S. government has not been able to foresee its continuous
defeats nor has it overcome the trauma of having a rebellious island
“almost within sight of our shores,” as John Quincy Adams
put it, and to top it all, without the slightest interest in being
“the state that we lack between the entrance to the Gulf and
the exit of the vast Mississippi Valley.”
The
great truth of all this, as Louis A. Pérez wisely comments, is
that Cubans have learned from history, but Washington has not.
This commentary was produced by
Globetrotter.