Category: History

U.N. Demands Release of Guantanamo Prisoner

In November 2022 (and publicly released on  April 28, 2023), the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which has no enforcement powers,  urged the U.S. to release  immediately a prisoner (Zayn al-Abidin Muhammed Husayn) who was captured in Pakistan in 2002 and became the first prisoner at a CIA “black site” (secret prison) where he was waterboarded and thereafter held until he was transferred to the Guantanamo prison in 2006. Ever since then he has been held there without charges. The U.S. has argued that although this prisoner was never a member of Al Qaeda, he allegedly helped jihadists reach Afghanistan for training before the 9/11 attacks.[1]

The U.N. Working Group found that this prisoner “had been denied a meaningful review of his detention and so was being unlawfully held. The appropriate remedy would be to release Mr. Zubaydah immediately and accord him an enforceable right to compensation and other reparations, in accordance with international law.’” Before his transfer to Guantanamo, he was held in CIA sites in Afghanistan, Poland, Morocco, Lithuania and Thailand; in the last of which he was waterboarded, deprived of sleep and confined in a coffin-like box.

His attorney, “Lt. Col. Chantell M. Higgins, a U.S. Marine, said this condemnation should provide “a greater incentive for the United States to find a place for him to go, and release him.”

Another attorney and specialist in international human rights,, Helen Duffy, who brought his case before this U.N. body, said that he “has a well-founded fear of further violations if sent to Saudi [Arabia, where he was born],and we hope to engage with the United States and other states on alternative sites of relocation.”

Colonel Higgins suggested Qatar might be a suitable location as it “has been generous and successfully taken foreigners detained at Guantanamo.”

============================

[1] Rosenberg, U.N. Body Demands Release of Guantanamo Prisoner Who Was Tortured  by the C.I.A., N.Y. Times (May 1, 2023). See also U.S. Should Release All Guantanamo Prisoners and Close Down, dwkcommentaries.com (April 29, 2023).

Roman Catholic Church Rejects Doctrine of Discovery

In the 15th century, the Roman Catholic Church issued several papal bulls announcing what became known as the doctrine of discovery that authorized various European powers to conquer the lands of non-Christians. In 1452, Pope Nicholas V issued the bull Dum Diversas, which authorized King Alfonzo of Portugal to “subjugate the Saracens and pagans and other unbelievers and enemies of Christ” and “reduce their persons to perpetual servitude” and “to take their belongings, including land,” and “to convert them to you, and your use, and your successors the Kings of Portugal.” In 1455 Pope Nicholas V issued Romanus Pontifex, which extended Portugal’s authority to conquer the lands of infidels and pagans for “the salvation of all’ in order to “pardon. . . their souls. This document also granted Portugal a specific right to conquest in West Africa and to trade with Saracens and infidels in designated areas.[1]

As discussed below, in March 2023 the Roman Catholic Church rejected this doctrine.

Church’s Rejection of the Doctrine[2]

The doctrine in more recent times has been subjected to criticism from indigenous peoples, and on March 30, 2023, the doctrine’s rejection came in a joint statement by two of the Vatican’s departments or dicasteries: the Dicasteries  for Culture and Education and for Promoting Integral Human Development.

After confessing that “many Christians have committed evil acts against indigenous peoples for which recent Popes have asked forgiveness on numerous occasions,” the Joint Statement said, “In our own day, a rewed dialogue with indigenous peoples, especially with those who profess the Catholic Faith, has helped the Church to understand better their values and cultures. With their help, the Church has acquired a greater awareness of their sufferings, past and present, due to the expropriation of their lands, which they consider a sacred gift from God and their ancestors, as well as the policies of forced assimilation, promoted by the governmental authorities of the time, intended to eliminate their indigenous cultures. As Pope Francis has emphasized, their sufferings constitute a powerful summons to abandon the colonizing mentality and to walk with them side by side, in mutual respect and dialogue, recognizing the rights and cultural values  of all individuals and peoples. In this regard, the Church is committed to accompanying indigenous peoples and to foster efforts aimed at promoting reconciliation and healing.”

In these conversations with indigenous peoples, “the Church has heard the importance of [our] addressing the concept referred to as the ‘doctrine of discovery.’ The legal concept of ‘discovery’ was debated by colonial powers from the sixteenth century onward and found particular expression in the nineteenth century jurisprudence of courts in several countries, according to which the discovery of lands by settlers granted an exclusive right to extinguish, either by purchase or conquest, the title to or possession of those lands by indigenous peoples.

The Joint Statement then said, “The ‘doctrine of discovery’ is not part of the teaching of the Catholic Church. Historical research clearly demonstrates that the papal documents in question, written in a specific historical period and linked to political questions, have never been considered expressions of the Catholic faith. At the same time, the Church acknowledges that these papal bulls did not adequately reflect the equal dignity and rights of indigenous peoples. The Church is also aware that the content of these documents were manipulated for political purposes by competing colonial powers in order to justify immoral acts against indigenous peoples that were carried out, at times, without opposition from ecclesiastical authorities. It is only just to recognize these errors, acknowledge the terrible effects of the assimilation policies and the pain experienced by indigenous peoples, and ask for pardon. Further, Pope Francis has urged: “Never again can the Christian community  allow itself to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior to others, or that it is legitimate to employ ways of coercing others.” (Emphasis added.)

In no uncertain terms, the Church’s magisterium upholds the respect due to every human being. The Catholic Church therefore repudiates those concepts that fail to recognize the inherent human rights of indigenous peoples, including what has become known as the legal and political ‘doctrine of discovery.’” (Emphasis added.)

 Reactions to the Rejection[3]

 This papal action was applauded the same day by the Roman Catholic Bishops for the U.S. and Canada.

 U.S. Bishops

The U.S. Bishops said, “The Joint Statement is yet another step in expressing concern and pastoral solicitude for Native and Indigenous peoples who have experienced tremendous suffering because of the legacy of a colonizing mentality. We welcome the statement’s renewed repudiation and condemnation of the violence and injustices committed against Native and indigenous peoples, as well as the Church’s ongoing support for their dignity and human rights.”

The U.S. Bishops also expressed ‘deep sorrow and regret” for the “times when Christians, including ecclesiastical authorities, failed to oppose destructive and immoral actions of the competing colonial powers.” In recent dialogues, “Tribal leaders have illuminated more aspects of this painful history, and, with humility, we wish to offer our continuing solidarity  and support, as well as a further willingness to listen and learn. We will continue to support policies that protect the poor and vulnerable, and that will offer relief to Native and indigenous families who are struggling.”

The U.S. Bishops also noted that “the centuries of history are complex, and the term ‘doctrine of discovery’ has taken on various legal and political interpretations that merit further historical study and understanding.”

Canadian Bishops

 After endorsing the Vatican’s Joint Statement, the Canadian Bishops noted that “numerous and repeated statements by the Church and the Popes over the centuries have upheld the rights and freedoms  of Indigienous Peoples” and that “Popes in recent times have also sought forgiveness on numerous occasions for evil acts committed against Indigenous Peoples by Christians.” The Canadians also reported that that the Canadian and U.S. Bishops and the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences are exploring the possibility of organizing an academic symposium with Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars to further deepen historical understanding about the “Doctrine of Discovery.”

The Canadians closed with the following July 2022 quotation from Pope Francis in Quebec City: “ [N]ever again can the Christian community allow itself to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior to others, or that it is legitimate to employ ways of coercing others.”

 U.N. Special Rapporteur on Rights of Indigenous Peoples

 The U.N. Special Rapporteur, JośeFrancisco Cali Tzay, acknowledged that the doctrine of discovery “was a theory that served to justify the expropriation by sovereign colonizers of indigenous land from their rightful owners” and “is still an open wound for many Indigenous Peoples around the world.” Therefore, this doctrine ‘must be addressed as part of a reconciliation process between Indigenous Peoples and colonial States.” Therefore, Tzay welcomed the Vatican’s rejection of the ‘Doctrine of Discovery’ and hoped that other governments would follow its lead.

 Conclusion

In the 19th century the doctrine of discovery was incorporated into U.S. law by the U.S. Supreme Court, a topic for exploration in a subsequent post.[4]

===============================

[1] Papal bulls, Wikipedia; Discovery doctrine, Wikipedia.

[2] Joint Statement of the Dicasteries for Culture and Education and for Promoting Integral Human Development on the “Doctrine of Discovery,” Bollettino Pubblico (Mar. 30, 2023); Povoledo, Vatican Repudiates ‘Doctrine of Discovery,’ Used as Justification for Colonization, N.Y. Times (Mar. 30, 2023); Cardinal Tolendtino, Statement on “Doctrine of Discovery,” a sign of reconciliation, Vatican News (Mar. 30, 3023); U.S. and Canadian Bishops welcome Vatican Statement on Doctrine of Discovery, Vatican News (Mar. 30, 2023); Church defends indigenous peoples: “Doctrine of Discovery’ was never Catholic, Vatican News (Mar. 30, 2023).

[3] USCCB, Statement on “Doctrine of Discovery,” (Mar. 30, 2023); CCCB, Statement by the Permanent Council of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops on the Joint Statement of the Dicastery for Culture and Education and the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development on the “Doctrine of Discovery,” CCB (Mar. 30, 2023):Lubov, UN rights expert hails Vatican’s rejection of ‘Doctrine of Discovery,’ Vatican News (Mar. 30, 2023);

[4] E.g., Doctrine of discovery, Legal Infor,. Institute (April 2022); /Johnson v. M’Intosh, Wikipedia.

A Contemporary Perspective on the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862

This blog previously explored various aspects of the 1862 U.S.-Dakota War that was fought in the State of Minnesota.[1]

Sarah Wakefield’s Contemporaneous Discussion of the War[2]

A contemporary perspective on that war was offered 160 years ago by Sarah Wakefield, a 32-year old white wife of a medical doctor assigned to the Upper Sioux Agency at the time of the war and who along with her four-year old son and 20-month-old daughter were held captives by the Dakota for the war’s six-weeks duration.

After the war ended, she testified on behalf of the Dakota people in criminal proceedings and thought her testimony had saved a Dakota farmer named Chaska who had been especially helpful to her and the children. Subsequently she learned that this Indian named Chaska had been hanged on December 26, 1862, apparently mistaken for another Indian with the same name.

A year later in 1863 Wakefield published a book about this experience, “”Six Weeks in the Sioux Tepees.” There she insisted her captors had treated her and the children well. They had saved her from sexual assault and had placed them in hiding during the war’s most dangerous moments. The Indians also had provided her with a blanket when she was cold.

Her book also criticized Col. Henry Sibley’s delays in rescuing the captives as well as the U.S. inhumane policies that had prompted a militant faction of the starving Dakota to wage war. Wakefield’s words brought on a lot of criticism of her from U.S. soldiers and officials. But Wakefield said, “My object was to excite sympathy for the Indians and in so doing, the soldiers lost all respect for me, and abused me shamefully, but I’d rather have my own conscience than that of these persons who turned against their protectors, those that were so kind to them in that great time of peril.”

==============================

[1] See these posts to dwkcommentaries: The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Nov.3, 2012); White Settler’s Contemporaneous Reaction to the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Nov. 6, 2012); Commemoration of the 150th Anniversary of the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Nov. 9, 2012); The U.S.-Dakota War Remembered by Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church (Part I) (Nov. 18, 2012); The U.S.-Dakota War Remembered by Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church (Part II) (Nov. 25, 2012); The U.S.-Dakota War Remembered by Minneapolis’ Westminster Presbyterian Church (Part III) (Nov. 29, 2012); Personal Reflections on the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (Dec. 10, 2012); Commemoration of the 150th Anniversary of the Hanging of the “Dakota 38” (Dec.26, 2012); Minneapolis and St. Paul Declare U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 “Genocide” (Jan. 12, 2013); President Abraham Lincoln’s Involvement in  the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (May 21, 2013); U.S. Military Commission Trials of Dakota Indians After the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 (June 11, 2013); President Abraham Lincoln’s Involvement in the Military Commission’s Convictions and Sentences of the Dakota Indians (June 24, 2013).

[2] Brown, Sarah Wakefield’s 160-year-old account still illuminates our understanding of the U.S.-Dakota War, StarTribune (Feb. 11, 2023).

Sub-Saharan Africa Is ‘New Epicenter’ of Extremism, Says UN         

On February 7 the U.N. Development Programme reported that searching for better jobs eclipses religious ideology as the main driver of recruitment to violent extremist groups in Sub-Saharan Africa. Moreover, 71%  of 2,200 interviewees said the precipitating event for joining such groups was human rights abuse, often conducted by state security forces.[1]

According to an officer of the U.N. Programme, ““Sub-Saharan Africa has become the new global epicenter of violent extremism with 48% of global terrorism deaths in 2021. This surge not only adversely impacts lives, security and peace, but also threatens to reverse hard-won development gains for generations to come. Security-driven counter-terrorism responses are often costly and minimally effective, yet investments in preventive approaches to violent extremism are woefully inadequate. The social contract between states and citizens must be reinvigorated to tackle root causes of violent extremism.”

To counter and prevent violent extremism, “the report recommends greater investment in basic services including child welfare; education; quality livelihoods; and investing in young men and women. It also calls for scaling-up exit opportunities and investment in rehabilitation and community-based reintegration services.”

This U.N. report underscores New York Times columnist Ross Douthat’s contention that a major challenge for the world this century is responding to the growing turbulent population of the African continent.[2]

===============================

[1] Musambi (AP), Sub-Saharan Africa is ‘new epicenter’ of extremism, says UN,  StarTribune (Feb. 7, 2023); Hope for better jobs eclipses religious ideology as main driver of recruitment to violent extremist groups in Sub-Saharan Africa, U.N. Dev. Prog. (Feb. 7, 2023); Journey to extremism in Africa: Pathways to recruitment and disengagement, U.N. Dev. Prog.  (2020).

[2] Another Defining Challenge of the 21st Century,  dwkcommentaries.com  (Jan. 28, 2023); Skepticism About Douthat’s Defining Challenge of the 21st Century, dwkcommentareis.com (Jan. 30, 2023).

Skepticism About Douthat’s Defining Challenge of the 21st Century 

As discussed in a prior post, New York Times’ columnist Ross Douthat argues that the  defining challenge of the 21st century is declining population in many of the world’s countries. [1]

Skepticism about this contention has been voiced by Wang Feng, a professor of sociology at the University of California, Irvin, even though he does not cite Douthat’s article.[2]

While conceding that “a shrinking global population . . . poses unprecedented challenges for humanity,” Feng says, “alarmist warnings are often simplistic and premature” and “can lead to hasty policy and human tragedy.”

Instead Weng says,  “The population declines seen today in some countries have come about largely as a happy story of greater longevity and freedom. Fertility rate worldwide dropped from more than five births per woman in the early 1960s to 2.3 in 2020. Credit greater investment in child and maternal health everywhere: A mother who successfully brings her child to term and an infant who survives to childhood lower birthrates because parents often don’t feel the need to try again. Greater availability of free or affordable contraception has also reduced unwanted births.”

Moreover, Feng asserts, “additional “women in the work force is a recipe for even greater productivity and prosperity and could help ease labor concerns among falling populations. More women than ever are rising to leadership positions in business, media and politics.”

“Compared with a half-century ago, people in many countries are richer, healthier and better educated and women are more empowered. “ This is associated with “[a]verage world life expectancy . . . [having] increased from 51 years in 1960 to 73 in 2019, and even more so in China, from 51 in 1962 to 78 in 2019. Increases of that magnitude reshape lives and open up opportunities unimaginable when life spans were shorter.”

“Fewer people on the planet, of course, may reduce humanity’s ecological footprint and competition for finite resources. There could even be greater peace as governments are forced to choose between spending on military equipment or on pensions. And as rich nations come to rely more on immigrants from poorer countries, those migrants gain greater access to the global prosperity currently concentrated in the developed world.”

Feng, however, concedes, “This new demography brings new challenges, including the need to offer quality and affordable child care, make college education more affordable and equitable, provide guaranteed minimum income and make societies more gender equal. Governments should abandon the mindless pursuit of economic growth in favor of well-being for citizens.”

Conclusion

 Whose side are you on? Douthat or Feng?

======================================

[1] Douthat, Five Rules for an Aging World, N.Y. Times (Jan. 21, 2023); Another Defining Challenge of the 21st Century, dwkcommentaries.com (Jan. 25, 2023).

[2] Feng, The Alternative, Optimistic Story of Population Decline, N.Y. Times (Jan. 30, 2033).

Another Defining Challenge of the 21st Century 

Ross Douthat, a New York Times columnist, asserts that at least one of the defining challenges of the current century is “the birth dearth, the population bust, the old age of the world.”[1]

This assertion is based, he says, upon “various forces, the Covid crisis especially, [that] have pushed birthrates lower faster, bringing the old-age era forward rapidly.”  Additional support for this thesis, he says, is China’s recent announcement that “its population declined for the first time since the Great Leap Forward, over 60 years ago.” And “variations on that shadow lie over most rich and many middle-income nations now—threatening general sclerosis, and a zero-sum struggle between a swollen retired generation, and the over-burdened young.”

Douthat then asserts the following “Rules for an Aging World:”

  1. “The rich world will need redistribution back from old to young.” “[R]eform [of] old-age entitlements will become ever more essential and correct — so long as the savings can be used to make it easier for young people to start a family, open a business, own a home. And countries that find a way to make this transfer successfully will end up far ahead of those that just sink into gerontocracy.”
  2. “The big bottlenecks [of the new A.I. technology] aren’t always in invention itself: they’re in testing, infrastructure, deployment, regulatory hurdles.”
  3. “Ground warfare will run up against population limits [as we see today in the Russia-Ukraine war and the tensions over Taiwan].”
  4. A “little extra youth and vitality will go a long way.” For example, “countries that manage to keep or boost their birthrates close to replacement level will have a long-term edge over countries that plunge toward . . .half-replacement-level fertility.” The same “will be  true within societies as well.”
  5. A major challenge in this new age will be the international response to the projections that Africa’s population will “reach 2.5 billion by 2050 and [4.0] billion by 2100. . . .The balance between successful assimilation and destabilization and backlash [of the African diaspora] ….will help decide whether the age of demographic decline ends in revitalization or collapse.”

Reactions

Wow!, This is a new and frightening projection of the next 80 years for all of us on planet Earth today! We certainly have seen these challenges in states in the Middle West like Minnesota, Iowa, the Dakotas and Nebraska, and this blog has advocated for increased immigration in these states to counteract aging and declining populations.  Nearly everyone in the U.S. today and in the future should join me in a chorus, “I am a proud descendant of immigrants!!”

At the end of the Douthat column are many comments from readers. Here are a few of those comments:

  • Geoff Burrell of Western Australia said, “Aged 72 I tend to agree that longevity is currently a problem but hasn’t ‘age at dying’ decreased in western countries due to the pandemic, a trend that may continue for many decades as new Covid variants and climate change induced pandemics come along. The article also characterizes elderly people as a ‘burden’ but doesn’t recognize the substantial portion of any population’s wealth they hold, much of it, ironically, used to support younger family members. Immigration is also able to overcome most of the deficits faced by a population with an ageing society, though that requires a good immigration policy to ensure the country gets what it wants.”
  • Edwin, an American MD in Africa, thanks Douthat “for his recognition of the importance of Africa. Most of Africa’s low- and middle-income countries have 50% or more of their population under the age of 17 years. The education, health and stability of Africa’s children and adolescents is critically important, and will be a major determinant of global security in the 21st Century…” He adds, “Northern Nigeria, where I spend much of my effort, now has a huge number of people living in extreme poverty. Yet the young people in this area of Africa’s most populous nation have much promise. We in the West must prioritize the health, education and security of places like northern Nigeria.”
  • Nicholas Mellen of Louisville, KY agrees with Edwin. “An aging population? Allow migrants in. They’re young healthy and ambitious. The most productive and successful Americans are usually within the first 3 generations; these migrants will do the same: from Haiti, Honduras, Iran, Sudan, Venezuela, Russia, China, Afghanistan to name a few. You have to be brave, persistent, hopeful and lucky to survive the journey. So there’s how you rejuvenate an aging nation.”
  • Patrick Bohlen of Orlando, IL, says, “Allowing for more immigration is an obvious top 3 solution that would solve many of the issues brought about by the demographic shift. It will also be unavoidable with climited migration. . . . We don’t need higher birth rates, but we do need sane immigration policies that help address both the demographic and climate crises.”
  • Anne F of New York, concludes her comment, “We don’t need to be concerned about population decline as it is part of a long-term picture of sustainable human existence. Climate needs to be the focus.”

Surprising news relating to this subject was the recent release of information about the results of the 2021 Gallup World Poll based on detailed interviews with nearly 127,000 adults in 122 countries. “Globally, people’s desire to move reached its highest point in a decade, but interest in moving to the U.S. plunged. When asked where in the world they would want to migrate, 1 in 5 potential migrants — or about 18% — named the U.S. as their desired future residence. The new numbers marked a historic decline that began in 2017, when just 17% — the lowest rate ever recorded — said they’d want to move to the U.S. In previous years, the U.S. has polled between 20% and 24%.”[2]

The managing editor of this World Poll and one of the report’s authors, Julie Ray, attributed the decline in foreigners desire to relocate to the U.S. to anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim policies of the Trump Administration. A Palestinian man, for example, came to the U.S. for graduate study because he thought the U.S. offered “infinite opportunities, but soon he saw a U.S. “workaholicculture,” a lack of fulfillment and evaluating a person’s value by their job status.

==============================

[1]  Douthat, Five Rules for an Aging World, N.Y. Times (Jan. 22, 2023).

[2] Abdeleziz, Fewer People Are Interested in Migrating to The U.S. Than Ever Before. Here’s Why, HuffPost (Jan. 26, 2023); Pugliese & Ray, Nearly 900 Million Worldwide Wanted  to Migrate in 2021, gallup.com (Jan. 24, 2023).

The Cuban Missile Crisis: Immediate Postmortems

On the 60th anniversary of the resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis, the National Security Archive has published five previously confidential government documents relating to the immediate postmortems about the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962.  Those documents are (1) a Soviet summary of a meeting between Nikita Khrushchev and Czechoslovakian Communist Party leader, Antonín Novotný; (2) correspondence from Khrushchev to Fidel Castro; (3) Castro’s own lengthy reflections on the missile crisis; (4) a perceptive aftermath report from the British Ambassador to Cuba; and (5) a lengthy analysis by the U.S. Defense Department on “Some Lessons from Cuba.”[1]

The Archive’s Summary of Those Documents.

Here is the just published Archive’s summary of those documents.

“In the immediate aftermath of the resolution of the Cuban Missile Crisis, [in October   1962], Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev met with the Czechoslovakian Communist Party leader, Antonín Novotný, and told him that ‘this time we really were on the verge of war . . . ‘ Khrushchev repeated [this phrase] later in the meeting, during which he explained how and why the Kremlin ‘had to act very quickly’ to resolve the crisis as the U.S. threatened to invade Cuba. ‘How should one assess the result of these six days that shook the world?’ he pointedly asked, referring to the period between October 22, when President Kennedy announced the discovery of the missiles in Cuba, and October 28, when Khrushchev announced their withdrawal. ‘Who won?’ he wondered.”

“The missile crisis abated on October 28, 1962, when Nikita Khrushchev announced he was ordering a withdrawal of the just-installed nuclear missiles in Cuba in return for a U.S. guarantee not to invade Cuba. His decision came only hours after a secret meeting between Robert Kennedy and Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin during which the two agreed to swap U.S. missiles in Turkey for the Soviet missiles in Cuba—a part of the resolution of the crisis that remained secret for almost three decades.”

“But the crisis did not actually conclude. Cut out of the deal to resolve the crisis, a furious Fidel Castro issued his own ‘five point’ demands to end the crisis and refused to allow UN inspectors on the island to monitor the dismantling of the missiles unless the Kennedy administration allowed UN inspectors to monitor dismantling of the violent exile training bases in the United States. In addition to the missiles, the United States demanded that the USSR repatriate the IL-28 bombers it had brought to Cuba, which the Soviets had already promised Castro they would leave behind.”

“The Soviets had also promised to turn over the nearly 100 tactical nuclear weapons they had secretly brought to the island—a commitment that Khrushchev’s special envoy to Havana, Anastas Mikoyan, determined was a dangerous mistake that should be reversed. In November 1962 ‘the Soviets realized that they faced their own ‘Cuban’ missile crisis,’ observed Svetlana Savranskaya, co-author, with Sergo Mikoyan, of The Soviet Cuban Missile Crisis: Castro, Mikoyan, Kennedy, Khrushchev, and the Missiles of November. ‘The Soviets sent Anastas Mikoyan to Cuba with an almost impossible mission: persuade Castro to give up the weapons, allow inspections and, above all, keep Cuba as an ally,’ she noted. ‘Nobody knew that Cuba almost became a nuclear power in 1962.’”

“From the Cuban perspective, the outcome of the Crisis de Octubre was the worst of all worlds: a victory for the enemy and a betrayal by the ally that had installed the missiles to defend Cuba. Instead of relief that a massive U.S. invasion had been avoided, along with nuclear war, the Cubans felt ‘a great indignation’ and ‘the humiliation’ of being treated as ‘some type of game token,’ as Castro recounted at a conference in Havana 30 years later. But in his long report to London, drafted only two weeks after the Soviets began dismantling the missiles, British Ambassador Herbert Marchant perceptively noted that it was ‘better to be humiliated than to be wiped out.’”

“At the time, Ambassador Marchant presciently predicted ‘a sequence of events’ from which the Cuban revolution would emerge empowered and stronger from the crisis: ‘A U.S. guarantee not to invade seems certain; a Soviet promise to increase aid seems likely; a Soviet plan to underwrite Cuba economically and build it into a Caribbean show-piece instead of a military base is a possibility,’ he notes. ‘In these circumstances, it is difficult to foresee what forces would unseat the present regime.’ His prediction would soon be validated by Khrushchev’s January 31, 1963, letter inviting Castro to come to the Soviet Union for May Day and to discuss Soviet assistance that would help develop his country into what Khrushchev called ‘a brilliant star’ that ‘attracts the working class, the peasants, the working intellectuals of Latin American, African and Asian countries.’”

“In his conversation with Novotný, the Soviet premier declared victory. ‘I am of the opinion that we won,’ he said. ‘We achieved our objective—we wrenched the promise out of the Americans that they would not attack Cuba’ and showed the U.S. that the Soviets had missiles ‘as strong as theirs.’ The Soviet Union had also learned lessons, he added. ‘Imperialism, as can be seen, is no paper tiger; it is a tiger that can give you a nice bite in the backside.’ Both sides had made concessions, he admitted, in an oblique reference to the missile swap. ‘It was one concession after another … But this mutual concession brought us victory.’”

“In their postmortems on the missile crisis, the U.S. national security agencies arrived at the opposite conclusions: the U.S. had relied on an ‘integrated use of national power’ to force the Soviets to back down. Since knowledge of the missile swap agreement was held to just a few White House aides, the lessons learned from the crisis were evaluated on significantly incomplete information, leading to flawed perceptions of the misjudgments, miscalculations, miscommunications, and mistakes that took world to the brink of Armageddon. The Pentagon’s initial study on ‘Lessons from Cuba’ was based on the premise that the Soviet Union’s intent was first and foremost ‘to display to the world, and especially our allies, that the U.S. is too indecisive or too terrified of war to respond effectively to major Soviet provocation.’ The decisive, forceful, U.S. response threatening ‘serious military action’ against Cuba was responsible for the successful outcome. For the powers that be in the United States, that conclusion became the leading lesson of the Cuban Missile Crisis.”

“But none of the contemporaneous evaluations of the crisis, whether U.S., Soviet or Cuban, attempted to address what is perhaps the ultimate lesson of the events of 1962—the existential threat of nuclear weapons as a military and political tool. In his famous missile crisis memoir, Thirteen Days, published posthumously after his assassination, Robert Kennedy posed a ‘basic ethical question: What, if any, circumstances or justification gives this government or any government the moral right to bring its people and possibly all peoples under the shadow of nuclear destruction?’ Sixty years later, as the world still faces the threat of the use of nuclear weapons, that question remains to be answered.”

Conclusion

This blog has published two posts about the Cuba Missile Crisis.[2]

=======================================

[1] The Cuban Missile Crisis @ 60, National Security Archive. The National Security Archive is a nongovernmental organization that was “founded in 1985 by journalists and scholars to check rising government secrecy. [This Archive] combines a unique range of functions: investigative journalism center, research institute on international affairs, library and archive of declassified U.S. documents . . ., the leading non-profit user of the U.S. Freedom of Information Act, [a] public interest law firm defending and expanding public access to government information, [a] global advocate of open government, and indexer and publisher of former secrets.” (About the National Security Archive.) 

[2] Fidel Castro-Nikita Khrushchev Messages During the Cuba Missile Crisis of 1962, dwkcommentaries.com (Sept. 5, 2016); Conflicting Opinions Regarding the Relative Strength of U.S. and Soviet Missiles, 1960-1962, dwkcommentaries.com (Nov. 2, 2016).

Memory Issues for People in Their Eighties

Joe Biden, who just turned 80, will be 86 in 2028 should he be re-elected and serve another four-year term as U.S. President. This has prompted political speculation whether his age is or should be a disqualifying attribute for his seeking re-election. This issue was discussed in an interesting New York Times article about memory issues facing people in their 80’s in the U.S.[1]

The article starts with the following general comments:

  • “[W]hile the risk of life-threatening diseases, dementia and death rises faster with each passing decade of a person’s life, experts in geriatrics say that people in their 80s who are active, engaged and have a sense of purposecan remain productive and healthy — and that wisdom and experience are important factors to consider.”
  • “ Biden, . . . experts agreed, has a lot going in his favor: He is highly educated, has plenty of social interaction, a stimulating job that requires a lot of thinking, is married and has a strong family network — all factors that, studies show, are protective against dementia and conducive to healthy aging. He does not smoke or drink alcohol and, according to the White House, he exercises five times a week. He also has top-notch medical care.”
  • “His race is another [positive] factor. The life expectancy for the average white, 80-year-old man is another eight years, said Dr. John Rowe, a professor of health policy and aging at Columbia University. ‘And that’s the average,’ Dr. Rowe said. ‘A lot of those 80-year-olds are already sick; they are already in the nursing home.’”
  • “Scientists who study aging stress that chronological age is not the same as biological age — and that the two often diverge as people grow older. It is true that older people tend to decline physically, and the brain also undergoes changes. But in people who are active, experts say, the brain continues to evolve and some brain functions can even improve— a phenomenon experts call the ‘neuroplasticity of aging.’”
  • “’This idea that old age is associated with only declines is not true,’ said  Dilip Jeste, a psychiatrist who has studied aging at the University of California, San Diego. ‘There are studies that have been done all over the world which show that in people who keep active physically, socially, mentally and cognitively there is increased connectivity among specific networks, and even new neurons and synapses can form in selected brain regions with older age.’”

Further comments were provided by five additional experts.

“Dr. Dan Blazer, professor emeritus and psychiatric epidemiologist at Duke University School of Medicine, who led a committee of experts that examined “cognitive aging” for the National Academy of Sciences in 2015, said, ‘Slippage of memory is something that is usual, but it is not a real deficit.’ He described such slippage this way: ‘They forget, they remember they have forgotten and they eventually remember what they have forgotten.’”

Another expert on aging, Dr. Gill Livingston, a psychiatrist at University College London, who led a commission on dementia in 2020, observed, ‘Once people reach 65, the risk of dementia doubles every five years. In general, she said, in high-income countries like the United States, dementia will affect 10 percent of people aged 80 to 84 and 20 percent of those aged 85 to 89.”

Lisa Berkman, a professor of public policy at the Harvard School of Public Health who studies health and aging, added a more nuanced view. ‘People in their 80s commonly experience declines; we shouldn’t be naïve about that. And at the same time, there is so much variability. People who are doing well and are in the top level of functioning, have the odds of going for another 10 years, of doing really well during this time and making very important contributions.’”

Jay Olshansky, an epidemiologist at the University of Illinois Chicago, names both Mr. Biden and former President Donald J. Trump, who is 76, as likely fitting the profile of “super-agers” — a ‘subgroup of people that maintain their mental and physical functioning and tend to live longer than the average person their age.’”

“Dr. Olshansky also says it is a misconception to think being president ages a person; in fact, former presidents tend to live longer, as an analysis he published in 2011 showed. Former President Jimmy Carter, who has been active well into his 90s, turned 98 last month. President George H.W. Bush was 94 when he died in 2018.”

“As the baby boom cohort ages, the number of octogenarians is growing into what experts have called a “silver tsunami.” In its 2020 Profile of Older Americans, the federal Department of Health and Human Services reported that the 85-and-older population was projected to more than double from 6.6 million in 2019 to 14.4 million in 2040.”

Reactions

On November 21, the Times published 583 comments on this article. Here are a few of them:

  • Jim K said, “If either party offers a younger candidate with a fresher and less polarizing vision/agenda for the nation, that party’s candidate will probably win the election. In my opinion, that is who the independents – the middle of the road types – would vote for.”
  • Joe Barnett said, “If he decides not to run, he can wait until the primaries and then endorse or just watch the Democrats pull from their wealth of talent to replace him.”
  • Northern D offered, “It will actually speak to Biden’s legacy if he knows when to leave and still be capable of helping his successor not matter who he or she is. In my estimation that should be sooner rather than later.”
  • Therion boston, “Step down Man! The United States needs a leader that is younger, fresher, and more vibrant. Our whole country needs to put forward a fresh face.”
  • MCM said, “The appropriate question is whether the United States can run the risk that he may not be. And the article suggests that while he has many advantages, that possibility exists.”
  • WHC says, “By their mid80s most individuals have some cognitive decline, and if there is one job where we don’t want the holder to have cognitive decline it’s president of the United States. Yes, decline is not guaranteed, but the odds are clearly rising, and shutting your eyes to it—or to declare legitimate worries ageism, as though he’s just a laid off fifty something—isn’t serving your readers.”

Although I voted for Mr. Biden in the 2020 election, I think he should not run for re-election because of concerns about the potential adverse effects of his aging during a second term and of some voters declining to vote for him for that reason. I also think that many of the younger voters, who turned out in great numbers in the 2020 election, would appreciate having a younger candidate to vote for. My recommendations: U.S. Senators Cory Booker or Amy Klobuchar.

As a mid-80’s white male, retired lawyer with three university degrees who is in relatively good health and active in various ways, I am glad to learn that my age does not automatically mean that I am destined to suffer significant physical and mental decline in the balance of my 80’s. However, I acknowledge that my short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be. When I mentioned this issue to a friend of my generation, he loaned me a book, “Remember” that emphasizes forgetting is part of being human while some memories are built to last only a few seconds and others can last a lifetime. The book’s author, Lisa Genova, is a neuroscientist and acclaimed novelist. I look forward to reading this book and hopefully getting tips on improving my memory.[2]

================================

[1] Stolberg, The President Is Turning 80. Experts Say Age Is More Than a Number, N.Y. Times (Nov. 20, 2022),

[2] Author Spotlight: Lisa Genova, Harmony Books.

Other Tributes to Walter Mondale at His Memorial Service   

Other tributes to Walter Mondale at his May 1st Memorial Service were provided by Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, former Minnesota Governor Arne Carlson, Minnesota civil rights leader Josie Johnson, and University of Minnesota President Joan Gabel and Professor Larry Jacobs. [1]

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz: “Walter Mondale changed every person he came in contact with. He changed this state, he changed this nation and he changed this world, all for the better.”

“Fritz was a national figure, but at heart — and everyone in this room knows — he was always just a boy from southern Minnesota. He embodied a sense of joy. He lived his life every single day with that joy at the forefront.”

“At 91, he was still fishing for walleye. Unlike me, he was catching them.”

“Everyone who met Fritz Mondale considered him a friend. Few people I’ve ever met did you feel were more present when you were with them. There was no place he needed to be. There was no-one more important than that moment. And every person I’ve ever talked to felt that.”

Former Minnesota Governor Arne Carlson: “Today, we celebrate the life of Minnesota’s finest; Walter Mondale. No doubt there will be remembrances of his leadership on a host of issues ranging from human rights to world peace. But the highest tribute is to honor his values and give them immortality.”

 “First and foremost has been his commitment to fairness. He saw it in the light of endlessly pursuing the elimination of all barriers to achievement for all people. His vision for our democracy was an even playing field and, I suspect, he would define the American Dream in that same context.”

“That enveloping philosophy led him to pursue policies that enhanced the quality of life for all people ranging from universal access to quality and affordable health care to ending violence whether by war or the endless slaughter of innocent victims of gun violence.”

“And he understood the necessity of serving as stewards of the land we inherited. His work to save the BWCA and the St. Croix {River] will always remain memorable. But, he also stayed current and challenged us to be ever vigilant of the monied interests who desire to convert nature’s bounty to private gain. It was this that led him to publicly oppose sulfide mining which threatens our valuable waters.”

“Always involved, always supportive of full public debate, and always decent. But, his sense of decency was never be seen as a sign of weakness, No, Walter Mondale was never guided by the odds or the polls, but rather the rightness of the cause.”

“So today, we pay tribute to a true leader and protector of the public good. And, hopefully, we will all make his values our values. We could do no better.”

Josie Johnson, First Lady of Minnesota Civil Rights: “I never will forget how excited I was at the thought of Fritz Mondale running for president. I never will forget how honored I felt.”

“This humble man, who always welcomed other points of view and encouraged everyone in his sphere to be open, to be inclusive, to be just, and the thought of him running for president of the United States of America, was just such a wonderful, unbelievable thought that many of us had, because he was such a humble person.”

 “And for him to understand that who he was and what he represented was what we needed in our society made us all want to be engaged in everything we could be engaged in and get that message out to the public and to the community.”

Joan Gabel, University of Minnesota President: “On behalf of a grateful university, we recognize with appreciation the countless and inspiring ways Vice President Mondale gave back to his alma mater and made us all better — as a teacher and leader, as a namesake and benefactor to our law school and Humphrey School fellowship program and as a friend and mentor to students and colleagues alike.”

 “The University of Minnesota is fortunate to have held such a special place in his universe — and across his exemplary life of dedication and service to Minnesota and the world, as vice president, U.S. senator, presidential candidate, U.S. ambassador to Japan and Minnesota’s attorney general.”

“It is therefore left to us to step into his indelible footprints — here at his alma mater, in the hearts of our university family and throughout the world.”

“So, let the path he forged guide us in his ever-optimistic way, and let it heal us, so we can ensure, in his honor, that our best days still lie ahead.”

Larry Jacobs (the Walter F. and Joan Mondale Chair for Political Studies at the Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota): “For 16 years, Walter Mondale and I worked together on a number of projects. But Walter Mondale brought his greatest passion to teaching. We taught thousands of students here at the University of Minnesota: undergraduates, graduates, folks who were auditing and wanted to take the class. He was a breath of fresh air; he was rigorous and he was demanding.”

“Preparation and seriousness are Mondale traits, particularly Professor Mondale. During one group presentation, Mr. Mondale pointed to a student who was leaning against the chalkboard, put up his hands to stop the group presentation and said, ‘Stand up. Convince us that you actually believe what you’re saying.’”

The student stood up, and all of us thought, ‘Oh my God. Always stand up straight.’”

“I was not immune from the scrutiny. During one class, when I was carefully, I thought, relating the readings for the class and the topic at hand, Mr. Mondale raised his hand. He asked a question that probably more of my colleagues should be asked now and again, though we’d prefer it not be asked by a former vice president of the United States. Mr. Mondale asked, ‘What are you talking about?’”

Conclusion

Here are the previous blog posts about the Mondale Memorial Service:

==============================

[1]  Excerpts from speeches and letters read at Walter Mondale’s memorial, StarTribune (May 1, 2022).

 

Hurricane-Damaged Cuba Needs Immediate U.S. Recovery Help 

“Hurricane Ian caused great devastation [in Cuba]. The power grid was damaged, and the electrical system collapsed. Over four thousand homes have been completely destroyed or badly damaged. . . . In the western province of Pinar del Rio, famous for its tobacco production, over 5,000 farms were destroyed. In small towns like San Luis, 80% of all homes were left damaged . . . . Cuba must be allowed, even if just for the next six months, to purchase the necessary construction materials to REBUILD. Cubans are facing a major setback because of Hurricane Ian.”[1]

These words buttressed the demand by a U.S. organization, The People’s Forum,[2] in a full-page ad in the Sunday New York Times for the U.S. to end the U.S. embargo of the island, the U.S. designating Cuba as a “state sponsor of terrorism” and the U.S. complex processes for dispatching disaster relief. The People’s Forum added the following:

  • “It is unconscionable at this critical hour to maintain the embargo and engage in collective punishment against an entire people by preventing Cuba from purchasing construction materials or receiving aid.”
  • President Biden put Cold war politics aside—even for six months!”
  • “The people of Cuba are part of our family—the human family. Don’t let outdated Cold War politics prevent peace-loving people from helping the Cubans to rebuild and return to their homes, rebuild the electrical grid, and have clean drinking water and access to food. The time to act is now!”
  • “Cuba is our neighbor. The United States loses nothing by being a good neighbor and allowing Cuba to recover fully from this tragic moment.”[3]

================================

[1] Advertisement, Let Cuba Rebuild-Urgent Appeal to President Biden, N.Y.Times, p. A23 (Oct. 2, 2022). The ad solicited online donations through the website of another organization, LetCubaLive.

[2] The People’s Forum “are a movement incubator for working class and marginalized communities to build unity across historic lines of division at home and abroad. We are an accessible educational and cultural space that nutures the next generation of visionaries and organizers who believe that through collective action a new world is possible.” (The People’s Forum, About.)   The Forum previously has engaged in other efforts to promote U.S.-Cuba normalization. (The People’s Forum, Search Results: Cuba.)

[3] This advertised message provides an exclamation point to this blog’s most recent post, Criticism of President Biden’s “New Cuba Policy,” dwkcommentaries.com (Oct. 1, 2022).