The 'Cuban Spring' Fallacy: The Current Incarnation of a Persistent Narrative

Abstract

AbstractThis paper explores the role of communications technology in the U.S.-Cuban relationship. It argues that the idea that anti-government dissidents will use the Internet, cell phones, and social media to foment a popular uprising on the island, modelled after the 'Arab Spring' is flawed because it fails to take into account the uniqueness of the Cuban situation. The paper then explores how it has become possible for this idea to have gained such traction in certain discourses in the United States. In doing so, the paper considers the history of paternalism and imperial hubris that has dominated U.S. policy toward Cuba, with an emphasis on the relationship during the Castro era. The paper demonstrates that current U.S. policy rests on fallacious assumptions about Cuba, the Cuban state and the relationship between the Cuban state and the Cuban people. The belief in a 'Cuban Spring' and in the idea that the United States could engender revolution in Cuba via communications technology is part of this larger narrative.Keywords: Arab Spring, Cuban Spring, communications, technology, social mediaIntroductionWhen Republican primary candidate, Newt Gingrich, called for the United States to provoke a 'Cuban Spring' in January 2012 he was echoing a popular idea that technology, especially social media, could ignite revolution. This idea was popularised by the revolutions in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt in the spring of 2011 and somewhat earlier by the use of digital media in the protests in Iran after the 2009 election, known as the 'Green Revolution'. Appeals for the United States to help start similar uprisings in Cuba, now dubbed a 'Cuban Spring', have been heard ever since. This paper will explore the role of communications technology in the U.S.-Cuban relationship. In particular, it argues that the idea that anti-government dissidents will use the Internet, cell phones, and social media to foment a popular uprising on the island, modelled after the 'Arab Spring' is flawed for a number of reasons. This belief rests on a popular though problematic link between technology and revolution that has since been shown to have been overblown even in the 'Arab Spring' cases. Although this idea makes for interesting headlines it rests on a number of problematic assumptions about Cuba and does not take into account the uniqueness of the Cuban situation, in particular the state of communications technology in Cuba, the presence of civil society, the strength of the opposition movement, and political opinion on the island.The paper then explores how it has become possible for this idea to have gained such traction in certain discourses in the United States. In doing so, we consider the history of paternalism and imperial hubris that has dominated U.S. policy toward Cuba, with an emphasis on the relationship during the Castro era. Since the earliest days of the Cuban Revolution, American policy has been guided by the conviction that the Cuban state is near collapse and that the Cuban people are poised to revolt against their government. The paper demonstrates that current U.S. policy rests on similar assumptions about Cuba, the Cuban state and the relationship between the Cuban state and the Cuban people. The belief in a 'Cuban Spring' and in the idea that the United States could engender revolution in Cuba via communications technology is part of this larger narrative.The 'Cuban Spring' DiscourseEven after the events of the Arab Spring itself lost their lustre the idea of a 'Cuban Spring' remained a recurrent theme in the United States. The concept of a 'Cuban Spring' became part of the discourse of the Republican primaries in the spring of 2012. Newt Gingrich told Floridians during the CNN debate,I think it's amazing that Barack Obama is worried about an Arab Spring, he's worried about Tunisia, he's worried about Libya, he's worried about Egypt, he's worried about Syria, and he cannot bring himself to look south and imagine a Cuban Spring. …