Where I Stand — Hank Greenspun: Russia’s presence in Cuba is violation

Friday, April 20, 2001 | 9:38 a.m.

Note to readers: Sun founder Hank Greenspun's last Where I Stand column was written in 1989, the year he passed away. In the following weeks Classic Sun will feature columns written by Hank that still relate to today's headlines. This week marked the 40th anniversary of the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion. Hank addressed the contentious U.S.-Cuba relations in this column, which appeared on Sept. 14, 1962:

A reasonable approach to an unreasonable situation.

A large number of people are demanding that we intervene in Cuba. It is possible that intervention is the only solution of a perplexing problem.

There are times for reason and times for emotion and perhaps a combination of the two might be the answer which we seek for it should be apparent that as a nation, we cannot permit the extension of an aggravating and continually deteriorating condition.

As an American, I did look upon the warning from Premier Nikita Khrushchev with some degree of emotion. I even felt somewhat unreasonable and greatly startled to think this Russian boor would have the gall to tell us that further "provocations" by the U.S. against Cuba could lead to worldwide nuclear war.

I can subdue my emotions and curb my first impulse to scream for war against the Communist tyranny and instead approach it with some degree of reasonableness.

Reason should tell us that we would do well to look to our hole card, which is the Monroe Doctrine, set forth in 1823 by President James Monroe.

It was just for such purposes as now face us. The doctrine guaranteed all the independent nations of the Western Hemisphere against European interference "for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any manner their destiny."

The Monroe Doctrine grew out of conditions in Europe as well as in America. The three leading absolute monarchies of Europe were Russia, Austria and Prussia in Monroe's time. They had pledged themselves to "put an end to the system of representative government, in whatever country it may exist in Europe."

The U.S. feared that these three powers, misnamed the "Holy Alliance," might also try to suppress representative government in the New World.

Napoleon had broken things up in Europe, and European colonies in the Americas took advantage of the unsettled conditions to break away from mother countries.

Most formed republics with constitutions much like the U.S. While the Monroe Doctrine has been interpreted in various ways, in general the desire of Monroe and others who followed him was to prevent the bloodletting rampant in Europe from spilling over into Latin America.

It should be apparent to the most liberal and peace-loving among us that conditions which the Monroe Doctrine was to guard against are hitting us head-on.

There is interference in our hemisphere for the purpose of oppressing and controlling the destiny of a nation less than 90 miles from our mainland. No reasonable person can deny that Russia oppresses and attempts to control.

The ideological concept of the Reds has been nurtured by bloodletting in almost all countries where the communist flag has been planted and it is evident that in Cuba the "wall" that Monroe tried to erect around the Americas has been breached.

The Russians have achieved an important foothold behind the barriers set up by the Monroe Doctrine. They are arming and colonizing an island in which the U.S. has always had a paternal interest, with both their people and their ideas.

It is evident that Cuba is a Red arrow pointed straight at the heart of the United States and perhaps a revival of Teddy Roosevelt's "Big Stick" policy is in order.

Looking at it most reasonably, I think it's time we dumped Khrushchev, Castro and his Cuban crew where they belong -- into the Bay of Pigs.