• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
Page
  1. 1
    1
  2. 2
    2
  3. 3
    3
  4. 4
    4
  5. 5
    5
  6. 6
    6
  7. 7
    7
  8. 8
    8
  9. 9
    9
  10. 10
    10
  11. 11
    11

The Bay of Pigs Invasion

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

III. IV. The Bay of Pigs Invasion I. Introduction The Bay of Pigs Invasion was an unsuccessful attempt by the United States President John F. Kennedy, in 1961, to overthrow the government of the Cuban ruler Fidel Castro through United States-backed Cuban exiles. Kennedy's primary reason in pursuing this foreign policy decision was political: to stop the spread of Communism in Latin America. Another motive for this foreign policy decision was the United States' military concern of the Soviets exploiting Communism in Latin America. Additionally, there were economic motives concerning U.S. landowners' properties in Cuba that had been repossessed by the Cuban government without compensation. Several alternative policies could have been pursued were discontinuing Eisenhower's plan altogether, resolving conflicts diplomatically, or backing the anti-revolutionary forces more aggressively with U.S. forces. However, due to many reasons, these policies were not pursued. As a result of the decision to invade the Bay of Pigs, the U.S. suffered great humiliation which contributed to the detriment of the national interest of the United States. The invasion also lead to disturbed world peace by increasing tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union, leading to the establishment of Soviet military presence in Cuba and the Cuban Missile Crisis. II. Background The direction of the United States foreign policy of the Bay of Pigs Invasion was greatly affected by the start of the Cold War. During the Cold War, international politics were the result of rivalry between the United States and Communism in the case of the Soviet coalition, including Cuba (Rostow 210). In January 1961, increasing friction between the United States and Castro's leftist regime led President Dwight D. Eisenhower to break off diplomatic relations with Cuba, whom he saw as a Communist threat to stability in the Caribbean and Latin American region. Even before that, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had been training and supplying antirevolutionary Cuban exiles in Guatemala for a possible invasion of the Bay of Pigs. ...read more.

Middle

In his novel, America Russia and the Cold War 1945-1990, LaFeber, like Hawkins, implies that the invasion was a major mistake and that the U.S. should have tried to resolve issues diplomatically. Secretary of State, Rusk, was also opposed to the Bay of Pigs invasion at the time. In his autobiography, Rusk states that he was opposed to the entire operation, meaning that his ideas coincide with LaFeber's ideas. He believed that the United States should have backed out of the plan and tried to resolve conflicts diplomatically. However, Rusk was also troubled by that idea because if they had conducted the operation overtly, it wouldn't have given the U.S. the chance to mobilize overt support that "we might have gotten from other nations" (Rusk 215). Therefore, three possible alternatives to the Bay of Pigs Invasion were canceling the operation, resolving conflicts diplomatically, or invading Cuba more forcefully. VI. Reasons Why Alternative Policies Were Not Pursued Rostow's policy to back the exiles with U.S. military forces more forcefully wasn't pursued for several reasons. Firstly, Kennedy "was not about to throw the full strength of the carrier-based aircraft into the battle," because he didn't want to reverse his fundamental position that this was a conflict between Cubans, not a war between the United States and Cuba. Secondly, the option of moving from an invasion to a guerilla operation was ruled out by geography and the choice of the invasion beach. Thirdly, a political concern for the United States was that the plan might have caused other nations to take part. For example, Rusk feared that the plan would provoke the Soviet Union to take action against American forces. Fourthly, the United States wasn't officially permitted to go to war with Cuba. Rostow, stated that, "there was an ancestral sense that the Monroe Doctrine had been unacceptably violated," and that "there was no basis in American foreign policy... ...read more.

Conclusion

Both of them must be embarrassed about the failure of the attack and are probably rationalizing the Bay of Pigs Invasion actions. Victor Lasky, author of J.F.K. the Man & the Myth: A Critical Portrait and Seeds of Treason, presents a highly controversial picture of Kennedy in this biography. However, in the foreign policy decision of the Bay of Pigs, he subtly supports the President's actions. He defends Kennedy in his Bay of Pigs decision by arguing that he had no alternative. This shows that the author is not completely one-sided in representing President John F. Kennedy. Nevertheless, Lasky's biography on Kennedy's was published in 1963 before the release of archives on the Bay of Pigs in the 1980's. This is a severe limitation because Lasky did not have the advantage of time and hindsight. Lasky's work is less balanced than LaFeber's, America Russia and the Cold War 1945-1990. There were many more documents and information available to LaFeber in 1991, than there was to Lasky in 1963, regarding the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Therefore, one could deduce that LaFeber's work is more reliable. LaFeber uses a more objective approach to give a more critical view of Kennedy's actions the Bay of Pigs Invasion, where Lasky merely supports the President. IX. Conclusion In conclusion, the unsuccessful Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961 to overthrow the government of the Cuban ruler Fidel Castro by United States-backed Cuban exiles was a debacle. The goal of this foreign policy decision was to stop the spread of communism. Several alternative policies that could have been pursued were discontinuing Eisenhower's plan altogether, trying to resolve conflicts diplomatically, or taking it to the other extreme and backing the anti-revolutionary forces with U.S. military forces. However, due to political, economic, social, and geographic motives, these policies were not pursued. As a result of the invasion of the Bay of Pigs, the U.S. suffered immense humiliation which contributed to the detriment of the national interest of the United States. ?? ?? ?? ?? Nilou Huff IB # 0193-024 11 Nilou Huff IB # 0193-024 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. The Cuban Missile Crisis and the blockade

    as well, to prevent the fighters from getting shot down while making their bombing runs. This significantly increased the scale of the attack, which worried many people.xxv As a result of this, it was decided that an invasion would need to follow the air attack, as the military of Cuba

  2. Superpower Relations 1945-90

    * Kennedy wanted to scale-down the arms race. Since both sides now had so many weapons, if a nuclear war started it would mean mutually assured destruction. * It was therefore not necessary to have more weapons that the USSR; but to have roughly the same. * The MAD theory was brought home to people when the superpowers

  1. American History.

    - Sensing another compromise was necessary, Henry Clay [veteran of the 1820 and 1833 deals] stepped back up and, with the help of Stephen A. Douglas, came up with the Compromise of 1850. Obviously, the big issue was when territories could prohibit slavery [North = ASAP, South = very late in process when slaves hopefully already there].

  2. Evaluate the presidency of Dwight Eisenhower.

    Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., criticizes President Eisenhower for what he portrays as recklessness in his treatment of nuclear weapons and the central intelligence agency. It is not adequate, as Ambrose's writing would seem to suggest, to judge a persons actions only by there actual outcome.

  1. The Prelude to the 1975 War and the Cairo Agreement.

    members were in charge of operational security. Intelligence also showed that the Iranian embassy in Damascus paid $50,000 to a financial emissary named Hassan Hamiz to cover associated costs. Futhermore it was shown that a Syrian intelligence lieutenant colonel was involved in the planning several days before and that Sheikh Mohammed Fadlalla attended a meeting in the

  2. Were People at the time (1962) correct in regarding President Kennedy as the person ...

    would be brought to an end following Castro taking over Cuba in early 1959, but at this time the relationship between Fidel Castro and the Cuban Communist was not entirely clear. During the Cuban revolution that saw Fulgencio Batista's brutal regime overthrown and come to an end, Castro had been at the fore of the uprising.

  1. The Cuban Missile Crisis

    on publicly denouncing Stalin, met with fiery opposition from within the Kremlin, and, by 1957, it had become apparent that he was losing control of the formerly centralized Communist world. With rebellions springing up across Eastern Europe, then, and China beginning to pursue a course independent of Khrushchev's support, it

  2. Were contemporaries correct in regarding President Kennedy as the Saviour of The Western World ...

    to Kennedy as "combination of courage, coolness and determination" this clearly states that Sorenson thinks exceptionally highly of Kennedy and portrays him as a wonderful president and man. This feeling was that of most Americans at the time of the crisis which symbolises a great show of faith of that

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work