BBC doc: Brand Cuba (factors that have kept Cuba alive in the public imagination)

[Mika]

I know that many truthseekers here will enjoy this audio.

-->Note to DU's Cubaphobes: This doc is reality based,
has no car chases nor balls of knitting yarn to paw at,
therefore very boring.

Brand Cuba
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/documentaries/2008/12/081229_brand_cuba_one.shtml

In Brand Cuba, Allan Little analyses some of the factors that have kept Cuba alive in the public imagination over such a long period.

From the iconic images of Fidel Castro and Che Guevara, and the five decade-long stand-off between Cuba and the United States, to an exploration of Cuba's military exploits in Southern Africa, and the island's unique approach to diplomacy through medical aid.

Part one

2009 marks the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Revolution.

It was on January 1st, 1959 that the dictator Fulgencio Batista was forced flee Cuba.

A young revolutionary called Fidel Castro, along with his guerrilla fighters, marched into Havana and seized the city.

Allan Little begins this two part documentary by attempting to recapture the sense of elation that swept the capital.

Link to Part Two on BBC page.

:hi:

---

[Wilms]

1. Thanks for posting.

Really good.

And hats off to the BBC. Can you imagine that much relaxed candor from a US source? :rofl:

[dipsydoodle]

4. As you say

What we , in the UK , get as a matter of routine isn't exactly what the USA gets. No issues here - just a very popular holiday resort .

[rabs]

2. Cuban TV begins showing some of the 638 assassination attempts on Castro

eight-part series to be shown on Sundays; first part was shown yesterday.


---------------------------------

HAVANA: Cuban state television has premiered the series "El que debe vivir", which will examine some of the 638 attempts to kill former president Fidel Castro.

The first episode of the eight-part series, broadcast on Sunday night in prime time, ran 70 minutes and covered the earliest attempts to kill Castro before his rebel forces defeated dictator Fulgencio Batista's army in 1959.

------------------

Production of the series lasted three years.

The filming involved 243 actors and actresses, some of them stars of popular telenovelas and dramas, as well as 800 extras.

State media reported that the last episode will deal with the assassination attempt planned for November 2000 while Castro attended an event at the University of Panama during the 10th Ibero-American Summit.

Attempts have been made to kill Castro with bombs, sharpshooters and poison gas, as well as with poisoned cigars and milk.

Cuban officials say at least a dozen assassination attempts have been foiled at summits and during foreign trips.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Cuban-TV-runs-series-on-attempts-to-kill-Castro/articleshow/5661746.cms

--------------------

I hope the series is put on DVD and made available in Mexico or Chile, so I can order one.

Anyone know whether Cuban TV is available online? Maybe can see the program that way.

[flamingdem]

10. Is this the British Documentary? nt

[rabs]

11. no, series was filmed in Cuba by Cubans

It took over three years to produce.

Is there a Brit. docu on the same subject?

[flamingdem]

12. Yes, supposed to be good too

and I think it's called something like 650 Ways to Kill Castro.

[protocol rv]

3. Cuba's military exploits in Africa

That's an interesting phase, when Cuban soldiers were used by the Soviet Empire to further chaos and mayhem in Africa. In the end, it was all for nothing, the Soviet Union imploded, and the Cubans went home after taking thousands of casualties. Angola was their Viet nam war.

[Wilms]

5. That's not even close to being on topic.

But I expect little else from your effort to spin everything you reply to.

Start your own thread so it's easier to ignore.

[protocol rv]

6. Cuba's military exploits in Africa - is on topic

The article refers to "an exploration of Cuba's military exploits in Southern Africa". I thought it was a little strange to call it military exploits. I read about it, and it's more of a military debacle, thousands of Cubans killed and wounded, many sent home with AIDs, while fighting for a corrupt tribal chieftain fighting another corrupt tribal chieftain. If you want more detail, check it out in Wikipedia. Here's some of the content:

"The Battle of Cuito Cuanavale was one of the most important episodes of both the civil war in Angola (1975 to 2002) and the South African Border War. The armies of Cuba, Angola and South Africa met at Cuito Cuanavale in 1988, and the battle has been called "Africa's largest land battle since World War II".<1> With all sides claiming victory, it was a turning point in the Angolan civil war, leading to the departure of Cuban, South African and other foreign troops from Angola and Namibia, and the independence of Namibia which was also linked to their withdrawal."

and

"Major operations continued through 23 March 1988 including several massive ground assaults<37> with infantry (primarily UNITA), armoured cars and tanks on FAPLA positions. After this, the SADF withdrew the bulk of their forces.<38><39> They left the artillery, due to the difficulty in transporting it during the rainy season<40><41>. The South Africans continued shelling (using their long-range G-5 artillery<42>) both the air strip and the city, from the high grounds of the Chambinga Heights, for months.

Cuban and FAPLA forces retained the city. South African and UNITA forces claimed to have inflicted enormous casualties on Cuban and FAPLA forces, and to have accomplished their objective of repulsing the offensive against UNITA havens in southeast Angola. Cuban and FAPLA forces, however, count the failure of the South Africans to capture the city and the resilience of their troops under bombardment as a triumph. Regardless of which side was the victor, the battle marked a major turning point in the course of events in southern Africa.

By February 1988, it had become clear to all sides that a stalemate had been reached, and that a victory would not be achievable without a considerable escalation in the conflict.<43> Consequently, following a series of peace discussions throughout 1988 mediated by Chester Crocker, a peace accord was finally signed by the parties on 22 December 1988 in New York whereby South Africa and Cuba agreed to the withdrawal of their troops from Angola, and a timetable was set for Namibian independence from South Africa."

The latest on US-Angolan relations:

"The May 2009 visit of Angolan FM Assuncao dos Anjos to Washington, during which he signed a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement on the 16th anniversary of U.S.-Angolan bilateral relations with USTR Amb. Ron Kirk, and the August 9-10 visit of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Angola have opened a new chapter in the bilateral ties between the two countries. On November 16, 2009 in Washington, D.C., the United States and Angola launched meetings under a new framework for sustained bilateral engagement, with working groups on Energy Cooperation and Security Cooperation. Additional working groups on other issues of shared strategic interests, like agricultural development and food security, may be launched in the future.

At the same time, the energy-based U.S. trading relationship continues to expand and spark other ties. One offshoot has been the development of a Sister City relationship between Lafayette, Louisiana, and Cabinda, and between Houston, Texas, and Luanda. The Catholic University of Luanda has close links with a number of American institutions and has received support from the Angola Educational Assistance Fund, a U.S. non-profit organization organized by Citizens Energy of Boston. Sonangol has a longstanding program of educating its professionals in U.S. universities, complementing Chevron's policy of U.S. training for its own growing pool of Angolan professionals."

Note: Chevron, BP, ExxonMobil, and Elf are large multinationals engaged in the Angolan oil industry. As a major oil producer, it of course is getting a lot of tender attention by US diplomats.

Which brings me to a close: the Cuban involvement in the Angolan civil war was like their Viet Nam war, it really didn't mean anything of historical significance, did manage to get a lot of Cubans killed and wounded. General Ochoa, the general who led Cuban forces in Angola (who in turn was under a Soviet General), was later executed in Cuba, accused of being a drug dealer. As they say, glory is ephemeral.

[Wilms]

7. OTOH, you're lack of subtlety serves it's purpose.

It's pretty clear.

[protocol rv]

8. But it is on topic, isn't it?

I was somewhat surprised to see them mention Cuba's military adventurism in Africa, as if it were something which yielded some good. But the truth is war is seldom profitable, not even for those who "win" (if you are doubtful, consider what happened to the "winners" of the Great War or World War One, which were able to enjoy their "victory" for less than 23 years, as the Germans invaded France and bombed Great Britain until the rubble bounced).

Cuba's military adventurism in Africa can easily be compared to the adventurism which led the USSR to invade Afghanistan, the USA to invade Iraq, and Ethiopia to invade Somalia. They are excellent examples of nations ignoring the well known message of history, that wars seldom turn out the one their creators expect, and that glory in victory is usually very short lived.

Don't be fooled, violence is of very little use most of the time, and seldom benefits those who travel long distances to get involved in foreign wars which don't involve their national self-defense. These expeditionary adventures have a way of resolving themselves, such that invaders are eventually sent home with their tails between their legs. Sometime it takes time, but watch the USA in Iraq now, even that mighty power is being defeated in Iraq (a defeat the Americans will deny, claiming victory when history will show Iraq is an enormous blunder and a huge defeat for their empire).

Cuba tried to play the game the big dogs usually play, and in the end, they achieved nothing which benefits Cuba. History will judge Fidel Castro, and I suspect he'll be soundly criticized for the military adventurism in Africa.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

9. It's worth noting that in the Angola conflict, the U.S. (under Reagan)

supported UNITA, which was fronted by South Africa.

[protocol rv]

13. US Policy in Angola and Afghanistan

The US policy in the 1980's was fairly simple, to put money where rebels were fighting the Soviet Union. Money was poured into Angola, Afghanistan, and Nicaragua. Because the policy was a knee jerk reaction to their defeat in Viet Nam ("we're gonna show those commie bastards what it's like to fight guerrillas"), it didn't work very well because they only focused on war, and there was no strategy beyond defeating the Soviets.

Unita was a Chinese communist vehicle - they were commmunists, but the US wasn't too worried about dogma, they just wanted to drag the Soviets down. The Cubans got caught in the fight between the two superpowers because Castro was receiving Soviet aid, so they called on Cubans to do the dirty work in Africa. In a sense, the Cubans in Africa were mercenaries fighting for cheap Soviet oil.

I read a book written by a South African officer who fought in the war, and he wrote the South Africans were very very close to defeating the "bad guy communists" (UNITA being the "good guy communists"), but a Cuban unit was able to block their spearhead into Luanda early in the war.

Also, Cuban ability to withstand very high casualties at Cuito was a key. Cuito was the Cuban's Khe-San, the South Africans shelled them mercilessly, and the Cubans had to fight very hard to re-establish supplies into the town, where their troops were surrounded and shelled by SA long range artillery. But in the end, they were able to re-establish their supply links, and both sides fell into a war of attrition neither side wanted to fight. I forgot the book's title, but it's a very good read, and very honest.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

14. Yeah, never mind that in Afghanistan, the anti-Soviet rebels

were the precursors of the Taliban and the women of Afghanistan would have been far better off under a Communist government than under the Taliban.

Just go ahead and keep thinking like a 12-year-old boy playing Risk.

[protocol rv]

15. That's a 50 year old playing risk

They do behave like children, don't they? :-)

I don't think the alternative was to have the Taliban or communism. There are other alternatives for the Afghans. But it's a very busy place with a very long history. My DNA analysis says my ancestors on my mother's side went through there about 40,000 years ago, and on my father's side about 25,000 years ago. All of us are from Africa, and many of us turn out to be from Afghanistan.