The Cuban historian Mario Valdés Navia provided a detailed analysis of the origins and true context of the Platt Amendment, addressing the question of whether this amendment had any positive aspects or was simply "pure interventionism."
In an interview with CiberCuba, Valdés explained that to understand the acceptance of the Platt Amendment in Cuba, it is essential to grasp the historical context in which that policy was enacted.
The Platt Amendment was a law passed by the United States Congress in 1901 as an appendix to the first Constitution of Cuba. The Cuban regime has always denounced it as an interventionist policy, as it conditioned the island's independence on the acceptance of eight articles. These granted Washington the right to intervene in internal affairs and required land for naval bases.
The historian recalled that "Americans until the end of the 19th century had no doubts that it was very convenient for Cuba to become part of the United States," to the extent of making formal purchase proposals to Spain, which were rejected, stating that they would fight for that colony under the slogan "to the last man and the last peseta."
In that internal U.S. debate about what to do with Cuba, a Cuban lobbying group based in New York, led by Tomás Estrada Palma —official agent of the armed government of Cuba and secretary of the Cuban Revolutionary Party— and the diplomat Gonzalo de Quesada, was fighting for Washington to recognize the armed Cuban government.
However, according to Valdés, "the government of the United States did not want to, did not wish to, and never did recognize the armed government of Cuba because it wanted to take control of Cuba."
The historian emphasized a conceptual distinction that he considers fundamental: "Notice that I am making a distinction between seizing Cuba and annexing Cuba. To annex a country to the United States means to make it a state of the United States. And it is not the same for the United States to seize a country as it is for the United States to annex that country."
Despite the challenges, the Cuban delegation achieved a decisive victory: the Joint Resolution, approved before the invasion of Cuba, whose first point established that “Cuba must be and will be an independent republic.”
To achieve this, the delegation used diplomatic mechanisms and even provided bonds from the Republic of Cuba to members of the U.S. Congress to secure their votes.
Valdés noted that this formal guarantee of independence no longer exists under the same terms today.
"This guarantee, this guarantee of resolution, we do not officially have at this moment." However, he clarified that there is indeed existing legislation —the Helms-Burton Act— which establishes the requirements that a Cuban government must meet to be recognized by the United States.
The historian also addressed the concept of sovereignty, which the Cuban regime often invokes to shield itself from any external pressure.
"Sovereignty was not established to protect the interests of a State, nor even less so to safeguard the interests of a government, but to ensure the interests of the citizens that make up the Republic."
This interview takes place at a time when the 20th of May rekindles hopes for change among Cubans.
Valdés, who recently joined the Board of Directors of Cuba Próxima, within a broader context of the conversation, predicts that change in Cuba will arrive this year, although he insists it must be driven by the Cubans themselves, organized in an independent civil society.
Filed under: