From Our Inbox

What the Cuban Missile Crisis should teach us

 

The Cuban missile crisis broke out 50 years ago this month, and its lessons on weakness, strength and compromise have been recited ever since by politicians, pundits and historians. The problem — which has plagued U.S. foreign-policy time and again — is that these lessons are myths, based on sheer lies about how the crisis began and how it ended.

One of these myths has been thoroughly exploded (though many eminences seem not to know it). This is the notion that President John F. Kennedy got Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev to back down and remove his nuclear missiles from Cuba entirely through the threat of force. In fact, as revealed by JFK’s secret tape recordings of his meetings with senior advisers (evidence that’s been available at the Kennedy Library for 25 years now), the two leaders brokered a deal: Khrushchev would take his missiles out of Cuba; Kennedy would take his very similar missiles out of Turkey.

But the other myth, no less pernicious in its impact (and no less false), still endures. This is the legend that Kennedy cowered before Khrushchev at a summit in Vienna in the spring of 1961 and that, as a result, the crafty Communist aggressively deployed missiles in Cuba thinking the young president was too weak to respond.

In fact, however, the evidence — much of it declassified a decade ago from the Kremlin archives, and recounted in “Khrushchev’s Cold War,” a superb book by Aleksandr Fursenko and Timothy Naftali — reveals that it was Khrushchev who shipped the missiles out of weakness and insecurity.

Khrushchev did exploit what he saw as Kennedy’s weakness, but he made his move at a different time, about a different place: Berlin in the summer of 1961. And the abject failure of that ploy, the determined resistance of JFK, so riled Khrushchev that he sent missiles to Cuba a year later as a desperate effort to compensate for what he now saw as American superiority.

Let’s back up. At the end of World War II, Soviet troops occupied eastern Germany; the U.S., British, and French armies occupied sectors of the west. With the onset of the Cold War, the borders hardened into two separate countries. Berlin was an anomaly: a city 100 miles inside East German territory, itself divided in two — East Berlin and West Berlin, the latter a Western enclave and a prosperous contrast to the surrounding poverty.

In 1948, Stalin mounted a blockade to isolate and ultimately take over West Berlin, but the U.S. Air Force kept moving in supplies. Unable to block the airlift, Stalin called off the blockade. In 1959, Khrushchev mounted an effort to take over all of Berlin, but President Dwight Eisenhower resisted, and the two reached a provisional truce at Camp David.

In 1961, after the Vienna meeting with Kennedy, Khrushchev renewed his assault, announcing that if the West didn’t sign a treaty turning over all Berlin to East Germany, there would be war. Kennedy resisted, too, and in fact the Berlin crisis of August 1961 was nearly as tense as the Cuban crisis of October ‘62. At one point, U.S. and Soviet tanks faced each other, within firing range, across a checkpoint for 25 hours. Finally, Khrushchev backed down.

Around this time, thanks to new photo-reconnaissance satellites, the CIA and the Pentagon began to realize that — contrary to the fears of a few years earlier (fears that JFK had exploited in his 1960 presidential campaign) — there was no “missile gap.” Or, rather, there was a missile gap, but America was way ahead of the Soviet Union, not the other way around.

© 2012, Slate

Read more From Our Inbox stories from the Miami Herald

  • Star Trek fantasy meets Livermore reality

    MONTEREY, Calif. — If scientists and officials at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California seem a little starstruck these days, there’s a good reason: The lab’s massive National Ignition Facility, or NIF, has something of a starring role in “Star Trek Into Darkness,” which opened nationwide last week. “For many years, we’ve been waiting for ‘Star Trek’ to realize that they should be here,” NIF principal associate director Ed Moses told Live Science. “This is a very futuristic facility . . . and I think we’ve all been influenced by ‘Star Trek’s’ vision of the future.”

  • Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his fangirls

    OK, so Dzhokhar Tsarnaev stands accused of blowing up three people, injuring 282 more and shooting to death an MIT campus police officer. He’s also got fans, or more accurately, he’s got fangirls, thousands of them.

  •  

WIMMER

    Protecting journalists with federal ‘shield law’ a necessity for democracy

    In his recent op-ed, Yale Law Professor Stephen L. Carter concludes that a reporter’s shield law is a “bad idea” that “might change the status quo only a little.” Carter assumes that even without a shield law, “most prosecutors are too savvy to go after journalists.”

Miami Herald

Join the
Discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

The Miami Herald uses Facebook's commenting system. You need to log in with a Facebook account in order to comment. If you have questions about commenting with your Facebook account, click here.

Have a news tip? You can send it anonymously. Click here to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Miami Herald and el Nuevo Herald.

Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

  • Videos

  • Quick Job Search

Enter Keyword(s) Enter City Select a State Select a Category