Andre Sheppy replied 28th Apr '14:
How fresh and relevant is the Cuba/USA conflict ?
At this time, Cuba and USA can do well without getting into each other's face, much less mind. The laws of man, nature and God still considers separation as a just measure where appropriate.
The U.S loathes, or at least distrusts, countries which do not seek to be like it. It also does not fancy those countries which endeavour to be like it, politically or financially without adopting its ideology, or at least without consulting with it or making it an integral part of the process. In other words, the U.S desires to be seen as the gold standard, the one that everyone wants a piece of, when in fact, it is it who wants a piece of all the others. However, the U.S' true intention is often hidden under the deceptive cover of fair exchange; "you show me yours, and I will show you mine, and I might even allow you to touch it."
Consider Cuba to be a virgin who had come of age. Consider the U.S.A as one who had resources, or gifts, if you will. Such gifts included a pace-setting Hollywood, rapidly growing mechanical and tecnological industries, the best music the world had to offer, a promise for a better or, at least a fairer, chance of a more "secure" life, and the military capabilty to defend its, and infiltrate others', borders.
Say that the U.S.A had an interest in getting intimate with Cuba, but Cuba did not seem to be sufficiently impressed with the gifts that the U.S had to offer. This, by the way, is the modus operandi of most of the animal kingdom in seeking or seducing a mate. What the U.S, subsequently, tried to do, is what some animals, including humans, do when tokens of intimacy are rejected; they attempt to rape.
This rape attempt in the early 1960's had failed, but if the U.S had succeeded, it could have claimed justification of its action in the name of war, the Cold War. For the record, the context of rape in its literal sense is not justified, and is prosecutable, by international law. The law, however, does not seem to have the support and will that it requires to prevent such atrocities. Furthermore, as with domestic cases of rape, burden of proof, especially when contempt exists between the alleged victim and perpetrator, is very difficult. These laws and conventions have failed miserably in recent decades, possibly, and arguably, because it is a man's world, and one who is of European descent.
Cuba has since moved on, and so has the U.S.A. The U.S, under the guise of desiring to "free" the inhabitants of Cuba from its government's communist regime, has been exercising trade embargos on Cuba ever since, when, really, it is the hurt of rejection that has driven this action. The hurt of the perpetrator is a preposterous concept, which has been constructed by his own self-defence mechanisms. It is also a means of reminding Cuba what it has been missing out on. This play of power, as rape or attempted rape victims would know, can be distracting from the original crime, and used to prejudice the victim's allegation. However, Cuba has not given into either the US economic pressure or its psychological pressure. Cuba is a true survivor, and can boast a former president who has outlived several U.S presidents, and has seen them come and go. Legacies such as the one that Fidel Castro has left for Cuba, are those that often last a lifetime, because the masses will always cherish a David and Goliath moment.
It is for Cuba to forgive the US for its transgressions, but not to forget. It is for the U.S.A to apologise. Apologising, though, is so unlike the U.S. Furthermore, unless there is a risk of losing an election because of a failure to apologise, apologising can cost a ruling party a U.S general election. After all, "the free and brave do not apologise." There are also legal issues to consider. Culpability could leave the U.S open to civil actions such as reparations requests. It would be self-destructive for a rapist, after moving on and starting "a new life," to admit to be so. If any one thinks that I am now becoming overly sympathetic to the U.S.A, or have been so to Cuba, then consider both the perpetrator of the rape attempt (the U.S) and the victim (Cuba) as both males. This is not to say that rape of men is worse than rape of women, but it has been proven that the rape of individuals of various segments of the demography are impacted differently.
Homophobic or not, I cannot see Cuba and the U.S.A rubbing shoulders as if nothing happened. They are two countries which are just too different form each other, or perhaps "too alike." It could be therapeutic for the U.S to come out with the truth about its relations with Cuba, but it probably would use the interest of its national security as an excuse not to do so. Also, where does it say that each and every country has to interact or trade with each other, including with the U.S?