HANSON'S LATIN AMERICAN LETTER - Fidel Castro: The Scorecard - March 1980

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Anda

A March 1980 installment of HANSON'S LATIN AMERICAN LETTER evaluates Fidel Castro’s economic record and U.S.-linked geopolitical consequences across Latin America. It itemizes alleged causes of Cuba’s deteriorating economy, debates whether American business interests should fund or support elements of the Nicaragua regime, and reviews U.S. government messaging about Castro as a Soviet proxy. The text cites statements attributed to U.S. officials and external commentators, contrasting supposed economic “failures” with claims about Soviet dependence and regional implications for stability.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryReligion & Spirituality

FormatPDF

Pages5

Reading Time13 min

AccessFree to download

State of the Economy

Position with non-aligned nations

Internal situation

Spokesman in U.S. Senate

Status of collaborator in the conquest of Nicaragua

Capacity as a model for Jamaica and Caribbean

HANSON'S LATIN AMERICAN LETTER Dear Sir: Fidel Castro: The Scorecard:March 1980 1.State of the Economy: 2.Position with non-alignednations: 3. Internal situation: 4.Spokesman in U.S.Senate: 5. Status of its collaborator inthe conquest of Nicaragua: 6.Capacity to serve as model forJamaica and Caribbean generally: 7.SOLE REMAINING CUBAN RESOURCE: It is hardly a year since U.S.businessmen were rushing to Havana to payLAMENT OFintermediaries $20,000 each for the privilege figuratively of kissingU.S.the ring of the Cuban Minister of Foreign Trade,a privilege which theyBUSINESSMENwere persuaded would win them priority in helping to bail out the Cubaneconomy from the deepening deterioration it was suffering. Castro's economic failure was giving communism a bad name all over LatinAmerica,and it was imperative,these U.S.businessmen believed,that his economy besaved lest it serve as a warning to other Latin American countries of the real meaningof a communist economy. It was,after all,not the first time that U.S.businessmen had beenblinded by their ignorance and greed.Here they were justifying to their boards ofdirectors that this decision rested on the fact that Senator McGovern favored thebailout of Castro.Elsewhere in the United States the people had spoken in an electiontheir judgment on McGovern. Now the same businessmen are pressing for financing for the Nicaraguanregime on the chance that spare parts and other Cuban deficiencies can be suppliedthrough Nicaragua.Do they ever give up on a mistake? Or are they only cooperating with the 'moderates"in Nicaragua?The"moderates"insist that having drained their hundreds of millions from Nicaraguaduring the Cuban conquest,they do not intend to bring the funds back,knowing what A wekly lerte for buriesmew puMisbd prinady mWasbington,D.C. WASHINGTON 8 March 1980 Number 1825 Desperate.The one-quarter ofits gross national productaccounted for by Russia is noteven remotely adequate anymore.External purchasing power evenworse. Fatally compromised. 4,000 additional securityofficers named to quell dis-content.Castro has pledgedthat 'new prisons will bebuilt"to cage discontented.Now viewed as likely to losehis bid for re-election tothe Senate. State Department feels Govern-ment of Panama likely to fal1.Non-existent. Failure in Cubawide1Y recognized. Sale of additional Cuban soldiersto Soviet Union as cannon fodder. is ahead for Nicaragua.But if the United States Government is willing to send insome money,the ''moderates"might even be able to expand their resources in New York. Again,it is less than a year since President Carter told the press thatLAMENT OFdo not attribute at all the change in Nicaraqua to Cuba,"even as heCARTERhad full information on the activities of Castro toward that end.Again,REGIMEthere was the larger objective,to win support for Salt Il,even if itinvolved such strenuous prevarication. Now,Mr.Carter concedes he should have known better.Yes,the DefenseIntelligence Agency did testify that "outside support"had been the 'major contributingfactor"in the conquest of Nicaragua by the Sandinistas.But stil1,the Caribbean neednot be defined "as an area of vital interest!for the United States. Still,the State Department now urges on the business community its labelKREMLIN'Sof Castro as the "Kremlin's obedient vassal,"as if the collapse in Cuba0BEDIENThas not already shattered Castro's ego.Says the State Department:"CubaVASSALis trapped in an unprecedented dependency so great that it denies Cuba'spretensions to the contrary.No other country votes so systematicallywith the Soviet Union in the United Nations.No other country receives free military equipment and training from the Soviet Union.Its continuing and activemilitary involvement in league with the Soviet Union in internal affairs of othercountries makes normal relations with the United States impossible." "When it comes to the crunch,"Sir Herbert Marchant,former British

FAQs

What economic assessment does the letter attribute to Fidel Castro by March 1980?

It frames Castro’s economic performance as a failure that damages Cuba’s standing in Latin America and deepens deterioration in the Cuban economy.

How does the letter describe Cuba’s role in Nicaragua and the idea of U.S. financing?

It questions whether U.S. financing for the Nicaraguan regime could replace Cuban deficiencies, and it challenges whether backers would abandon a mistake or only work with “moderates.”

What U.S. government narrative about Castro does the letter quote or paraphrase?

It reports that the State Department portrays Castro as the Kremlin’s obedient vassal and emphasizes Cuba’s alleged dependency and military involvement tied to the Soviet Union.

Sep 21, 2026

Upload by Anda