Source A5 shows a meeting between Castro and Khrushchev, it may be noted they look very comfortable together as they discuss the state of Cuba. The meeting also made an impact on Khrushchev; he saw that America ‘meant business’ and he almost immediately began a large number of tests on nuclear warheads breaking the three year U.S – USSR moratorium on tests.
America had made a big mistake, the Bay of Pigs had riled Khrushchev and in an already poor state of relations, this could only cause heightening of the mistrust. Although despite this many perceived Kennedy as the saviour of the western world. In order to understand their views it is necessary to analyze the American point of view.
Kennedy was always cautious of the public view of himself. He needed to be portrayed as a hero to the western world, so when he discovered nuclear warheads on Cuba he was forced to act. Source B1 shows a photograph of a missile site on Cuba, this one of thousands taken from regular flights over Cuba by U2 spy planes and low level reconnaissance planes. A similar one is shown below.
After analyzing similar photographs the Americans discovered that the bases held both medium range and intermediate range missiles. This is where Kennedy’s fears lay. Source B2 shows the range of the Cuban missiles (The outer ring being the intermediate range). As you can see from the map the missiles on Cuba had the capability of hitting and destroying nearly all of the major U.S cities. This put major pressure on Kennedy especially considering the mid-term elections were due in 1962. If the Cuban missiles were launched American retaliation would be near to impossible. A launch would give America virtually no notice and shifted the balance of power toward the soviets.
Kennedy’s next move was to decide how to act. Kennedy had no real choice but to take firm action against the USSR over Cuba. Kennedy explored many options including the nuclear attack of Cuba, but eventually decided to place a quarantine around Cuba based on the advice from XCom (his executive committee). It has been said that the leading figure in this group was his brother Robert Kennedy. The Historian Stephen Ambrose, the author of the source B3, suggested that ‘The leading figure on the committee was the president’s younger brother, General Robert Kennedy.’ Therefore if we are to ask ourselves whether Kennedy is the savoir of the western world, the answer must partially be no. He acted heavily on the advice from his brother Robert Kennedy.
Kennedy had made his decision; he began a speech addressed to the American public on the 22nd of October 1962 (source B4). The source shows an extract of this speech where Kennedy gives four points of action he will be taking. The speech has a serious tone and states the obvious, truthfully. Kennedy makes small points throughout the speech which show he believes it is his responsibility to defend all of the Americas and the whole of the western world; ‘Peace and security of all the Americas’ and ‘defence of …… the entire western hemisphere’ are the words Kennedy uses.
The speech also speaks harshly toward Khrushchev and displays to him his serious intentions. The speech ends with words that display this; ‘I call upon Chairman Khrushchev to halt and eliminate this clandestine, reckless and provocative threat to world peace.
Following the speech, 6 days later, Khrushchev sent a letter addressed to Kennedy (28 October 1962). Source B5 shows an extract of this letter. On face value the letter shows that Khrushchev’s response to Kennedy’s letter was to back down. Khrushchev agreed to ‘cease further work’ and ‘dismantle those arms which you’ (Kennedy) ‘have described as offensive’. This seems like a great victory for Kennedy and would naturally be viewed as so by the western world. There is a view that Khrushchev’s intentions when sending the letter is that he is truly legitimate and cares about ‘endangering world peace’. He is backing down as to avoid tension and ease relations.
This was obviously not the American interpretation, as we see in source B5 (ii) which is displayed after the letter is sent. It symbolically shows an American victory by displaying a soviet ship Anosov carrying missiles back to Russia. A sweet victory, it seems.
The American point of view tells us that Kennedy could definitely be considered as the saviour of the western world, but in order to make a competent decision we must take into account the soviet and Cuban views.
Source C1 shows an extract from a speech made by Fidel Castro at the funeral of those Cuban’s killed in the Bay of Pigs incident of April 1962. The speech displays Castro’s true feelings toward the U.S. His frequent use of the word ‘they’ when referring to the Americans shows how mentally distanced from America he feels, he considers himself and Cuba to be very different. Castro refers to his ‘revolution’ as humble; he uses this adjective to display his intent, a peaceful one.
Castro now felt threatened by the U.S and saw that with the help of the soviet missile sites the defence of Cuba would be much easier. Source C2 displays a poster produced by the Cuban Government inspiring all of the Cuban people to defend the country.
The defence of Cuba was definitely a purpose for the Soviets placing missiles in Cuba but it was not their only reason. The main reason for the placement of missiles was the fact that the U.S has missiles installations in Turkey. Source C3 shows the range of missiles installed by the U.S in turkey. It displays that most of the major soviet cities were within range including the major sea port of Odessa. The map shows that missiles in Turkey posed just a threat to Russia as the Cuban missiles did to the U.S. In fact Turkey actually had a land boarder with Russia so it could be argued the Turkish missiles posed a greater threat.
The Soviets feared that the missiles in Turkey gave the U.S a first-strike capability and therefore could destroy land missiles in Russia before they were able to retaliate. By the soviets placing missiles in Cuba they put themselves in a bargaining position. This lead to Khrushchev’s second letter to Kennedy (source C4) sent on the 27th of October 1962.
The first point to note about this letter is that it differs greatly in tone to the first letter. The assumption made is therefore that the second letter was not written by Khrushchev alone. Khrushchev begins the letter by stating the similarity of positions. He uses the missiles in Turkey as a bargaining point, stating that Turkey had a large land boarder with Russia. Khrushchev suggests that the matter can be resolved at the United Nations and that he wishes the missiles in Turkey to be removed in exchange for the removal of Turkish missiles.
The soviets never once showed sign of using the missiles in Cuba and it is some historians opinion that the missiles were with placed with no intention of being used. One of these Historians is Callum Mac Donald. Source C5 shows an extract of a publication by Mac Donald which discusses the soviet intentions when placing the missiles in Cuba.
Mac Donald talks about the soviets not having immediate access to ICBM’s and therefore lagged behind in the arms race. He suggests that Cuban missiles were placed with the sole purpose of ‘restoring nuclear equality’. Khrushchev was using the missiles as a ‘quick solution’ to the arms race problem. He ends with a statement that sums up his general opinion of soviet intentions; ‘It was never intended that they should be used to launch a surprise attack against the United States.’
After looking at the soviet point of view we can see that Russia had good reason to place missiles in Cuba. America had attacked almost without any reasoning at-all and it had become clear to Russia that the U.S needed to be controlled. The U.S had missiles in Turkey which posed an equal threat to Russia as missiles in Cuba would do to the U.S.
It is necessary to consider whether or not Kennedy was the saviour of the western world despite what contemporaries may have thought. The first crucial point is the fact of Khrushchev’s two letters.
Khrushchev sent his first letter to Kennedy on the 26th of October 1962. At the time Kennedy wished to disburse the situation and ensure the missiles on Cuba were removed, this would in-effect resolve the situation. Consider source B5 which shows an extract of the letter, it would appear that Kennedy is the saviour as he resolved the situation and Khrushchev had agreed to remove the missiles, unconditionally.
This would all be fine if it had been the only letter sent. Although two days later Kennedy received his second letter from Khrushchev, with an intensely alternate tone. Source C4 shows an extract of this letter, it displays phrases like ‘I therefore make this proposal’ this shows how Khrushchev is now utilizing his bargaining point as of the Turkish missile situation.
The second letter made a proposition where the soviets would remove Cuban missiles if the U.S removed Turkish ones. This would not look good for Kennedy; it would display weakness to the U.S public and make a future election victory difficult. Therefore Kennedy had to solve the problem but ensure it was kept out of the public eye, this was where his brother Robert Kennedy came in.
Robert Kennedy met in secret with the soviet Ambassador to strike a secret deal. He agreed to the removal of Turkish missiles in exchange for the Cuban missile removal. The deal was finalised via a reply on the 28th of October 1962 and it was kept secret for many years.
The deal was perfect for Kennedy; it kept him looking like the hero and at the same time solved the crisis. But was it Kennedy alone who was responsible for the ending of the crisis?
Source D1 shows Kennedy’s inaugural address to the public in 1961, he is informing the public of his intentions to stand up to all who pose a threat the western world. It was these words that forced Kennedy to act quickly in the Cuban missile Crisis; he had to show he was being firm. An example of this behaviour was the Bay of Pigs incident which many historians believe to be the major cause of the crisis.
So why did Kennedy not stop the Bay of Pigs? One Historian J M Roberts who wrote The Hutchinson History of the world in 1976, an extract of which is shown in source D2, suggests that Kennedy did not stop the invasion as he was not ‘thoughtful’ nor cautious enough and simply allowed it to continue without thinking it through. Roberts’ personal opinion was that Kennedy was not the saviour, claiming that Kennedy’s hopes/plans, ‘Made no headway against the animosity aroused by America.’
Most actions Kennedy took were out of public view, Robert Kennedy’s deal for example and if these were brought to public attention their perception of Kennedy may have drastically changed.
Source D4 shows an American cartoon, it is important to note the statement it makes. It attempts to display Kennedy and Khrushchev working together in order to control nuclear war, this cartoon differs greatly from the stereotypical western view shown in the British cartoon of source D3. Here is the classic western show-down scene, portraying Kennedy as the hero defending the western world from the ‘evil’ Khrushchev and his ‘puppet’ Castro. This is a valid interpretation but definitely a biased one. When we consider Robert Kennedy and Khrushchev’s roles it is difficult to claim Kennedy is the saviour.
Another historian who thought similarly was Tony Howarth. He wrote a summary of the missile crisis in 1972 and he claims that Kennedy wasn’t the saviour; the crisis only gave him a better reputation. Howard uses the phrase, ‘The Cuban crisis was a sobering experience for both Kennedy and Khrushchev’. He is explaining that it brought them to their senses over the threat of nuclear war and allowed them to solve the problem together through co-operation.
Without the help of Robert Kennedy’s agreement and the co-operation of the Soviets via Khrushchev the crisis may never have sub-sided and finalized in nuclear war and essentially mutually assured destruction. Therefore a sensible conclusion is that Yes, Kennedy did take a role in the saving of the western world by preventing nuclear war. This would not have been possible without the co-operation of Khrushchev when compromising, and the good advice given to Kennedy’s from his Brother Robert Kennedy. Without this help the dispersion of the crisis may never have occurred.
Bibliography
The following websites were used for general reading in order to increase my knowledge:
Other Sources
- Superpower Rivalry, The Cold War 1945 – 1991 by Tony McAleavy
