Renata Keller, "The Fate of the Americas: The Cuban Missile Crisis and the Hemispheric Cold War" (UNC Press, 2025)

Summary

---

Podcast Summary

Episode Overview

Podcast: New Books Network
Host: Rachel Newman
Guest: Renata Keller, Associate Professor of History, University of Nevada, Reno
Book Discussed: The Fate of the Americas: The Cuban Missile Crisis and the Hemispheric Cold War (UNC Press, 2025)
Date: November 25, 2025

In this episode, Rachel Newman interviews historian Renata Keller on her new book, which re-examines the Cuban Missile Crisis through a hemispheric lens. Keller argues that the standard, often US-centric narrative misses the crucial roles and responses of Latin American nations and peoples, both in triggering and experiencing the 1962 crisis. The conversation uncovers overlooked themes of security, sovereignty, and solidarity—what Keller calls "the three S's"—and explores both government and grassroots reactions across the Americas.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

What’s Missing from Previous Histories

• Overlooked Perspectives: Despite exhaustive literature on the Cuban Missile Crisis, Latin American governmental and popular responses remain under-studied.
  • “There really wasn’t much at all about other Latin American responses, even either governmental or popular responses to the Cuban Missile Crisis… there actually is a huge hole here.” — Renata Keller [03:13]
• The motivation for Keller’s book arose when, for a commemorative conference, she searched for research on other Latin American countries’ experiences but found a lack of material outside a few articles.

The "Three S's": Security, Sovereignty, Solidarity

• Recurring Themes: Across the hemisphere, political actors and ordinary people debated and acted around the three S’s:
  • Security: Ranging from nuclear threats to fears of invasion or internal disorder.
  • Sovereignty: Arguments polarized around whether Cuba had the right to accept Soviet missiles, or if that acceptance compromised its independence.
  • Solidarity: With Cuba (anti-imperial), with the U.S. (anti-communist), or with other regional actors.
• “A defining feature of the hemispheric Cold War… in addition to divisions, there also were a set of shared values that drove people’s actions in this period.” — Renata Keller [06:38]

The Prehistory: Cuban Revolution’s Hemispheric Impact

• Inspiration and Alarm: The Cuban Revolution (1959) inspired leftist movements across Latin America to envision similar revolutions, but it also unified many governments against Cuba.
  • The U.S. and regional allies responded with sanctions, political and sometimes military action (Bay of Pigs, OAS ouster, etc.).
  • These united pressures were key in prompting the Soviet missile deployment in Cuba.

Challenging the Standard Timeline

• Traditional Narrative Revisited: The “13 days” focus (Oct 22–28, 1962) often ignores key multilateral aspects and excludes Latin American agency.
  • The Organization of American States (OAS) was pivotal, transforming the U.S. naval “blockade” into a multilateral, legally justified “quarantine.”
• Latin American Participation: Multiple countries contributed bases, logistics, and even naval vessels to the quarantine, complicating the narrative that the crisis was solely a U.S.-Soviet affair.
  • “A number of Latin American countries actually participated in the quarantine… Argentina and Venezuela sent two destroyers each.” — Renata Keller [16:25]

Visual Culture: Who Was in the Picture?

• Political Cartoons: A Brazilian cartoon depicted Kennedy and Khrushchev as chess players, with Castro as a powerless child—a strong critique on how power dynamics and sovereignty were perceived.
  • “It shows Castro sacrificing his sovereignty and being very childlike and powerless, hiding behind Nikita Khrushchev and letting someone else determine Cuba’s fate and the fate of the world.” — Renata Keller [12:56]

Experiences on the Ground—Ordinary People in the Crisis

• Cuba: Citizens prepared for both nuclear war and invasion, mobilizing militarily and economically, with major contributions from women and artists.
• Panama: The Canal Zone was seen as a prime nuclear target; thus, intense cooperation with U.S. authorities took place.
• Colombia: Public anxiety centered on fallout from a potential nuclear strike on the Panama Canal; media coverage fueled widespread fear and guidance on shelter-building.
  • “There was just a really high level of tension and I would say terror in Colombia during the missile crisis, in part because of their proximity to Panama, but also thanks to really alarming newspaper coverage.” — Renata Keller [21:41]

Political Catalysts and Domestic Fallout

• Protests and Violence: The crisis precipitated violent confrontations in multiple countries. In Bolivia, a riot between pro- and anti-Cuba demonstrators left five dead.
  • “More Bolivians died as a result of the Cuban Missile crisis than Cubans. And I think that goes to show just how much people saw their own fates connected to Cuba…” — Renata Keller [24:09]
• "War of Words": Political pamphlets, collected by intelligence agencies, revealed deep ideological divisions—supporters of Cuba drew parallels with anti-imperialist struggles; anti-communists saw an existential Red threat.
  • Artistic pamphleteering illustrated the emotive and grassroots level of engagement.

Who Won and Who Lost?

• Mixed Outcomes: Argentina emerged as both winner (closer U.S. ties, military gains) and loser (subsequent coups, U.S. support leading to military dictatorship).
  • “Some people in Argentina were big winners of the crisis, but then the majority came out definitely losers…” — Renata Keller [34:09]
• Left's Disillusionment: The crisis discredited both the Cuban example and alliances with the Soviet Union for leftist movements across Latin America. Many groups, feeling betrayed and directionless, questioned their strategies and identities moving forward.

Long-Term Legacies and Contemporary Relevance

• Continuity and Change:
  • Security & Sovereignty: Remain touchstones in contemporary hemispheric relations, especially in debates on drug trafficking and U.S. intervention.
  • Solidarity: Keller notes a marked decline in emphasis on hemispheric solidarity, especially under recent U.S. administrations.
  • “What I see that has changed significantly is this idea of solidarity… I think that in recent years has disappeared, much to our detriment.” — Renata Keller [37:09]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the three S’s:
  “People across the political spectrum were really worried about their security… They were also talking a lot about sovereignty… Then they were also debating how best to show solidarity and who they should show solidarity with.” — Renata Keller [05:00]
• On Cuba’s sense of betrayal:
  “They felt betrayed by the Soviets, especially because Nikita Khrushchev hadn’t bothered to incorporate them or to include them in the negotiations. … They had to learn through the news that what was happening in their own country.” — Renata Keller [30:20]
• On continuity of Cold War dynamics:
  “I see a lot of continuity in terms of issues of security and sovereignty… What I see that has changed significantly is this idea of solidarity.” — Renata Keller [36:22]

---

Key Timestamps

• 02:40 – Why another book on the Cuban Missile Crisis?
• 05:00 – Introduction of “the three S’s”
• 07:51 – Prehistory: How the Cuban Revolution catalyzed hemispheric responses
• 10:10 – The classical timeline vs. hemispheric experiences of the crisis
• 12:56 – Cartoon depiction: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and a sidelined Castro
• 15:14 – OAS and the formation of the Inter American Quarantine Force
• 19:59 – Ordinary people’s experiences in Cuba, Panama, and Colombia
• 23:34 – Protests and violent confrontations across Latin America
• 26:04 – The "war of words": Pamphlets and popular politics
• 29:03 – Disappointment with the crisis’s resolution in both anti- and pro-Castro camps
• 31:32 – Winners and losers: Argentina’s complex fate
• 34:28 – The blow to the Latin American left
• 36:22 – Relevance of the “three S’s” in today's hemispheric politics

---

Conclusion

Renata Keller’s work shifts our understanding of the Cuban Missile Crisis from a bilateral to a hemispheric and even popular phenomenon, highlighting the diversity of Latin American agency and reaction. The episode uncovers how 1962’s crisis echoed beyond superpower diplomacy, reckoning with the aspirations and anxieties of nations and people across the Americas—a lens still illuminating for today’s geopolitics.

Transcript

[Marshall Po]

Hello everybody. This is Marshall Po. I'm the founder of the New Books Network and if you're listening to this podcast on the New Books Network, I bet you like to read. I know that I do. That's why I founded the New Books Network. So as readers, we need to know what to read and I have a podcast to recommend for you. That being the Proofread podcast, do you have a goal to read more this year? How about a goal to read more of what you love and less of what you don't? The Proofread Podcast is here to help you. Hosted by Casey and Tyler, two English professors and avid readers with busy lives, Proofread helps you decide what books are worth spending your precious time on and what books aren't. They have 15 minute episodes that give you everything you need to know about a book to decide if you should read it or skip it. They offer a brief synopsis, there's fun and witty commentary, and there are no spoilers and no sponsored reviews. Life's too short to read a bad book, so subscribe to the Proofread podcast today. And by the way, there's a new season coming soon.

[KFC Advertiser]

A KFC Tale in the Pursuit of Flavor the holidays were tricky for the Colonel. He loved people, but he also loved peace and quiet. So he cooked up KFC's 499 chicken pot pie. Warm, flaky, with savory sauce and vegetables, it's a tender, chicken filled excuse to get some time to yourself and step away from decking the halls. Whatever that means. The colonel lived so we could chicken KFC's chicken pot pie the best $4.99 you'll spend this season.

[Renata Keller]

Prices and participation may vary. While supplies, taxes, tips and fees, extra hablas splicto dzoich com de nosk.

[Babbel Advertiser]

If you used Babbel, you would Babbel's Conversation based Techniques teaches you useful words and phrases to get you speaking quickly about the things you actually talk about in the real world. With lessons handcrafted by over 200 language experts and voiced by real native speakers, Babbel is like having a private tutor in your pocket. Start speaking with Babbel today. Get up to 55% off your Babbel subscription right now at Babbel.com Spotify spelled B A B-B-E-L.com Spotify rules and restrictions may apply.

[Marshall Po]

Welcome to the New Books Network.

[Rachel Newman]

Hello and welcome to New Books in Latin American Studies, a channel of the New Books Network. I'm Rachel Newman, a host on this channel. Today I'm delighted to be speaking with Renata Keller about her new book, the Fate of the the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Hemispheric Cold War. Renata is Associate professor of History at the University of Nevada, Reno. Her new book is published by the University of North Carolina Press as part of the series the global 20th century. And Renata is also one of the series editors for that. Welcome to the program, Renata.

[Renata Keller]

Thank you so much for having me.

[Rachel Newman]

We're so glad you could join us. The Cuban Missile Crisis has been the subject of many, many books and articles. I think you said thousands in the book. After all, it was, as you say, the moment the world has come closest to nuclear war. But there was something missing. So how did you realize that the close call was not the entirety of the story and that we actually needed a new perspective on the crisis?

[Renata Keller]

Yes. So like you said, there has been a lot already written about the Cuban Missile Crisis. And so I didn't go into my career thinking I'm going to be the next Missile Crisis person. I actually wrote about Mexico and Cuba in my first book. And in that book there was a little bit about the Cuban Missile cris and the role that Mexico played. And then when I was starting my first job, the first year that I was teaching was actually the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 2012, and a colleague was organizing a panel about it and invited me to share my work and suggested, well, you could talk about Mexico or you could expand it a little bit and talk about the rest of Latin America. And I said, sure, surely there must be other work about other parts of Latin America. And I can just add that to my own research. And there you go, there's my presentation. And I started looking and I was just shocked to see that there really wasn't much at all about other Latin American responses, even either governmental or popular responses to the Cuban Missile Crisis. There were two really good articles by Jim Hirshberg about Brazil and the missile crisis. But that. And so I realized, you know what, There. There actually is a huge hole here. And there is room for me to contribute a new perspective to this really well studied topic. So in.

[Rachel Newman]

In this book to, you know, fill that hole, among other things, your argument centers on the importance of what I'm going to call the three S's. I love alliteration.

[Renata Keller]

Me too. That's what I call them, too.

[Rachel Newman]

So what are the three S's? So that we can be ready to notice when they come up in our conversation going forward.

[Renata Keller]

So That's. I'm glad you noticed that. It was funny because when I was writing the book, I wasn't looking for them. What I was looking for were I was trying to answer, how did Latin Americans shape the Cuban Missile Crisis? And how did the Cuban Missile Crisis shape Latin America? So those were my two driving questions. And I. I just kept noticing these things coming up everywhere. Like, people were talking about capitalism and communism in the United States and the Soviet Union, but they were also just talking about security and sovereignty and solidarity constantly. People across the political spectrum were really worried about their security. They're interpreting security in a lot of different ways and really interesting differences among the ways, you know, whether they're talking about nuclear security or security, you know, from. From outside intervention or from, you know, local groups. Governments were worried about domestic security. And then they were also talking a lot about sovereignty and debating whether it was Cuba's sovereign right to accept nuclear missiles from the Soviet Union or whether they were sacrificing their sovereignty by allowing the Soviets to install bases on Cuban territory. And then they were also debating how best to show sovereignty and who they. Or, sorry, how best to show solidarity and who they should show solidarity with. So a lot of people were showing solidarity with Cuba and kind of defending Cuba's right to defend itself. A lot of government leaders were showing solidarity or with the United States and using that word to say that we need to show solidarity, we need to show hemispheric solidarity and protect the hemisphere against this threat. And so I was just kind of struck how often people were talking about these three things. And I think we could see that as a defining feature of the hemispheric Cold War, of the Cold War in Latin America, but also perhaps of the wider global Cold War, that in addition to all of these divisions, there also were a set of shared values that drove people's actions in this period.

[Rachel Newman]

So it's always challenging to know sort of where to start, the prehistory of the thing that we're trying to talk about, to explain. And in this book, you tell us that we can't understand the Cuban Missile Crisis if we don't talk about the Cuban Revolution and what that revolution meant for the people of Latin America and also for Latin American governments. So what do we need to know about the late 1950s, the early 1960s, to help us make sense of what's coming ahead, those tense 13 days in 1962 that we're going to be talking about?

[Renata Keller]

Yes, as you mentioned, it's. It's so hard to know where to start? Actually, the first draft of my book, I started with the Monroe Doctrine. And then I was like, I am never going to get to the missile crisis at this rate. Um, and so I, I zoomed in a little bit more on the, the late 1950s and early 1960s, because one of my central arguments is that it was hemispheric responses to the Cuban revolution that helped cause the Cuban Missile Crisis. And this is because the Cuban Revolution was such a huge change from what came before. And it was really inspirational to a lot of people. They looked at how the Cubans were able to overthrow a dictator and reassert their sovereignty from the way that the United States had dominated their government and their economy. And so a lot of people across Latin America said we should do that in our own countries and we should copy the Cuban route to revolution, the Cuban formula for revolution. And so a lot of people either traveled to Cuba for training or looked to Cuban sources like Che's Guide to Guerrilla Warfare to bring the revolution home to their countries. And at the same time, a lot of people in Latin America were also really alarmed by the Cuban Revolution and by the Cubans efforts to export the revolution. And so governments across the Americas united to a significant extent against the Cuban government and kicked them out of the Organization of American States, participated in the Bay of pigs invasion in April 1961. And so I think it was these attacks against the Cuban government that prompted Nikita Khrushchev to offer missiles, nuclear missiles, to Castro and that motivated Castro to accept the missiles, even though he knew that it would be interpreted as sacrificing Cuban sovereignty.

[Rachel Newman]

So the middle chapters of the book are about the crisis itself, which unfolds over actually pretty short period of time, under two weeks. And we're going to travel all over the hemisphere and meet many people to understand that. Before we dive into that, could you narrate for us kind of the big picture story of the crisis itself and how it played out over those 13 days?

[Renata Keller]

Sure. So the typical narrative is this timeline, right, where on October 22, 1962, John F. Kennedy reveals to the world that they have found evidence that the Soviet Union has secretly placed nuclear missiles in Cuba and starts a process of negotiation between the United States and the Soviet Union. Kennedy declares that he's going to set up a quarantine around Cuba. And then there's a series of messages back and forth between Kennedy and Khrushchev, negotiating what to do. And there is a very tense moment when Soviet boats, or ships, sorry, boats, is belittling ships are approaching the quarantine line, and they eventually, ultimately decide to turn back most of their ships and respect the quarantine. And then on October 28, 1962, Khrushchev retreats and he announces that he's going to remove his missiles from Cuba. So that's the standard narrative. Those are kind of the high points in the standard narrative. What I do in my book is I look at different events during the Cuban Missile Crisis. So I look at the role that the Organization of American States play, played in setting up the quarantine and making it a multilateral act of hemispheric defense instead of a unilateral act of war, which is what it would have been without OAS support. And then I also look at actions in the United nations, ways that Latin American countries and Latin American citizens use the United nations to push for peace. I look at how other Latin American governments, including Mexico and Brazil, also pushed for peace. And then I look at public responses across the hemisphere. I look at protests. I call it a war of words. There are a lot of pamphlets that people created that I was able to find in various archives in which you can really see how they are thinking about the missile crisis and their role in it. I look at acts of sabotage and this kind of escalating wave of violence that starts rising across Latin America as a crisis proceeds.

[Rachel Newman]

So we'll start by talking about one of the images in your book. I know our listeners can't see the images, so I'm going to ask you to describe it a little more. But this is an image that shows Kennedy and Khrushchev playing chess. And there's a childlike Castro looking over the Soviet leader's shoulder. If I remember right, can you tell us where this cartoon appeared, what it means, and maybe are there some actors that are kind of missing from that particular depiction of the missile crisis? If we're looking from Latin Americ, that's a great question.

[Renata Keller]

So that particular cartoon came from a Brazilian newspaper, and I thought it was fascinating because it addresses a lot of these. I'd say at least two of the three S's that I've been talking about. It shows Kennedy and Khrushchev endangering the entire world, kind of treating security as a game of chess, not really respecting security, but just toying with people's security. And it shows Castro sacrificing his sovereignty and being very childlike and powerless, hiding behind Nikita Khrushchev and letting someone else determine Kiba's fate and the fate of the world. And So I really liked that cartoon. It doesn't show anyone else having any power. It just shows Khrushchev and Kennedy being the ones in control. And so it doesn't really address public responses, but it shows, I think, at least how the cartoonists felt that Kennedy and Khrushchev were not being very responsible or very respectful, that they were treating the crisis as a game. And the cartoonists certainly didn't have much respect for Fidel Castro and depicted him, like you said, as a child instead of a powerful leader.

[Rachel Newman]

Probably Castro would not have liked this cartoon if he had seen it, though, right?

[Renata Keller]

He probably did see a lot of the cartoons. He was not very pleased with public responses that depicted him as sacrificing Cuba's sovereignty. He did hear about quite a bit of the criticism, and he was very displeased with it.

[Rachel Newman]

Some of what your book goes into are these sort of moments of Latin American nations coming together on certain questions, and in this case, a security question to form the Inter American Quarantine Force. Can you tell us, first of all, quarantine. Why are we using that word? I'd love to hear a little more about the Organization of American States, too, what that is and sort of how it's playing a role in this story. What is this quarantine force meant to do? What is it actually doing? Why does it matter that it's inter American and not just the United States?

[Renata Keller]

Yes. So first of all, Kennedy's administration decided to use the word quarantine because they didn't want to have comparisons to the Berlin blockade. They wanted to make it look like this was not an act of war. A blockade would have been an act of war. And they wanted to give it more legal standing by using the term quarantine. And so they went to the Organization of American States because under the auspices of the Rio Treaty, the Organization of American States can take multilateral efforts to defend hemispheric security. So that gave the quarantine legal standing. And the Organization of American States is a multilateral regional organization that was created around the same time as the United Nations. And it was created to coordinate hemispheric action, especially when it came to issues of security, but also things like economics. And this was really, I argue, the height of inter American hemispheric action to defend the region's security. So every single country in the Organization of American States voted to approve the quarantine. They voted unanimously. And this was a big deal. It sent a very clear message to the rest of the world that this crisis wasn't just a US Cuba conflict or a US Soviet conflict, but that all the countries of the Americas agreed that nuclear weapons were an unacceptable threat to their security. And so it sent a really clear message to Cuba, to the Soviet Union, and to the rest of the world that the rest of the countries in the Americas agreed with the United states and supported U.S. efforts to remove the missiles. And then a number of Latin American countries actually participated in the quarantine, which I found surprising because we always look at this as a US Effort. But quite a few Latin American countries offered bases within their national territory. They offered naval bases and air bases. Other Latin American countries, including Argentina and Venezuela, sent ships. So they each sent two destroyers to participate in the quarantine. And they all of these Latin American armed forces joined a part of the quarantine that was called the Inter American Quarantine Force that operated in the southernmost part of the Caribbean. So they formed the southernmost part of the quarantine circle around Cuba, if you will. Hi, I'm here to pick up my son, Milo. There's no Milo here. Who picked up my son from school?

[United Airlines Advertiser]

Streaming only on Peacock.

[KFC Advertiser]

I'm gonna need the name of everyone that could have a connection.

[Renata Keller]

You don't understand. It was just the five of us. So this was all planned. What are you gonna do? I will do whatever it takes to get my son back.

[KFC Advertiser]

I honestly didn't see this coming. These nice people killing each other. All her fault.

[United Airlines Advertiser]

A new series streaming now only on Peacock.

[Rachel Newman]

This is a real good story about Bronx and his dad, Ryan. Real United Airlines customers.

[United Airlines Advertiser]

We were returning home and one of the flight attendants asked Bronx if he want to see the flight deck and meet Kathy and Andrew.

[Renata Keller]

I got to sit in the driver's seat.

[KFC Advertiser]

I grew up in an aviation family.

[Renata Keller]

And seeing Bronx kind of reminded me of myself when I was that age.

[Rachel Newman]

That's Andrew, a real United pilot.

[Renata Keller]

These small interactions can shape a kid's future. It felt like I was the captain.

[United Airlines Advertiser]

Allowing my son to see the flight.

[Renata Keller]

Deck will stick with us forever. That's how good leads the way.

[United Airlines Advertiser]

Shopping is hard, right? But I found a better way. Stitch fix online. Personal styling makes it easy. I just give my stylist my size, style and budget preferences. I order boxes when I want and how I want. No subscription required. And he sends just for me pieces plus outfit recommendations and styling tips. I keep woodworks and send back the rest. It's so easy. Make style easy. Get started [e-mail] Spotify. That's stitchfix.com Spotify.

[Rachel Newman]

So shifting a little bit from sort of states and their participation in this hemispheric security effort. Let's think a little bit about some of the ordinary people that come up in your book. And I know that looking at their perspectives was something that was really important to you in doing the research. And you show us how Cubans, Panamanians and Colombians who are living through the missile crisis during these 13 days were very frightened and were trying to make preparations for an apocalyptic disaster. Did each of these countries sort of have specific threats that they faced, and how were ordinary people responding to those threats?

[Renata Keller]

Yes. So in that chapter, I decided to call it Homeland Security because these were some of the places where people were most directly in the line of fire, if you will. So in Cuba, they were really worried about not just a nuclear war, but about an invasion. There was a very real prospect of that they could be invaded at any moment. And so the Cuban government called upon people to be prepared. And they responded, for the most part, very enthusiastically. People reported to their militia units because a lot of people in the militias had been working in factories and in fields. The government asked women to fill their spots. And so Cuban women worked in the factories to keep the factories humming to packed economic security, because they were really worried about shortages as well. And they also donated a lot of blood in case there was an invasion and it was needed. And then Cuban artists responded by creating posters and writing songs. And so everyone kind of took up their weapons and did what they could to. To defend the homeland against a possible invasion. In Panama, they were also worried because the Panama Canal would have been a very appealing strategic target if Cuba and the Soviet Union decided to launch their nuclear missiles against anywhere in the Americas. The Panama Canal was very vulnerable and would have cut off transportation between the Soviet or, sorry, between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. It would have taken out the US the. The foremost United States base in Latin America where they had a lot of their surveillance capabilities. And so Panamanians actually worked very closely with the United States government to do whatever they could to protect the Panama Canal. And then in Colombia, I thought the Colombian story was really fascinating because I found all of these newspaper articles in Colombia that showed that people were really alarmed about the prospect of nuclear war and about their proximity to Panama because Panama was such an attractive target. The Colombians were worried, like, they probably aren't going to bomb Colombia, but they might bomb Panama. And if they do, are we within range of nuclear fallout? And so there are all these maps in the Colombian newspapers where they're trying to figure out, okay, if the wind is blowing this way and there's nuclear bombing in Panama, like, will it reach Bogota? And so actually, there was just a really high level of tension and I would say terror in Colombia during the missile crisis, in part because of their proximity to Panama, but also just in part thanks to this really alarming newspaper coverage that was constantly warning about the danger of nuclear war and telling Colombians how to build shelters and how to protect themselves if at all possible.

[Rachel Newman]

So in addition to this upheaval and sort of fear in everyday life, the Cuban Missile Crisis acted as a political catalyst, sparking both rhetorical and on the ground confrontations in many different parts of Latin America. Could you tell us a little bit about how you researched or sort of discovered something about those confrontations and about some of the ones that, I don't know, you find the most interesting or surprised you the most?

[Renata Keller]

Yes. So I started learning about those conflicts when I started this project. I went to the John F. Kennedy Library, and they had some reports about what was going on in Latin America during the crisis. And they were saying, you know, things are getting a little wild down here. It's is where there's. There are some places where we might lose control, where the government, where our allied governments might lose control. And. And so I looked in some of the places where they were sending these reports, and one of them was Bolivia. And so what happened was in a lot of places, people were organizing protests, and in some of those protests, it escalated into the violence. And it wasn't just Bolivia. There. There were violent confrontations in Brazil, in Argentina, in. In Uruguay, all over the place. But in Bolivia, there was a conflict between anti communist demonstration that was organized in the morning, on the morning of October 26th in La Paz. And then that afternoon, there was a pro Castro or pro Cuba demonstration. And the people from the two demonstrations started fighting, and it escalated into a riot that lasted hours. Eventually, the government had to call up the military to quash the riot, and five people died. And so that was shocking to me to learn that more Bolivians died as a result of the Cuban Missile crisis than Cubans. And I think that goes to show just how much people saw their own fates connected to Cuba and how much they were willing to risk to influence the outcome of the missile crisis and to show solidarity with either the United States or Cuba. And it shows the power of this issue to unsettle politics in Latin America outside of where the missiles were. So it wasn't just about the missiles, but it was about those three S's, security, sovereignty and solidarity, that these issues were so important to people that they were willing to fight and die over them.

[Rachel Newman]

In addition to putting bodies on the line, as you describe, maybe you could say something too about the war of the words, the teeny tiny sort of pamphlets or flyers that you found. You know, what were people talking about when they were making political speech about the missile crisis?

[Renata Keller]

That. Yes, the war of words. That was one of my favorite chapters because I think it really gives you a good sense of how people were interpreting the Cuban Missile crisis outside of the government. And a lot of these pamphlets I found in governmental archives, right? So US Ambassadors collected pamphlets and Latin American intelligence agencies collected pamphlets. And one of the richest collections I found was in an intelligence archive in just outside of Buenos Aires in Argentina. And the intelligence agents there were just collecting everything they could find, and they were also helping distribute some pamphlets. But I was able to see what arguments people were making to support their positions either in support of Cuba. People were saying that what they're doing to Castro now is just like what Peron's opponents did to him 15 years ago and were fighting the same people. And that why should we support the United States? They're criticizing their governments for supporting the United States, and they're saying we should overthrow our government that is aligned with international capitalism and exploiting Argentina and we should show solidarity with Cuba. Like, there's no reason Argentine lives should be wasted in this quarantine and in attacking a fellow Latin American country. And on the other hand, I found pamphlets that they had collected that were anti communist. And they were saying, like, this is our best chance to get the Red menace out of the Americas and we need to support the United States, and if we don't, Argentina could be next. And so it was really interesting to see these perspectives from everyday people that. That were preserved through the pamphlets that they created. And some of them were very artistic. I found a really cool one with this, like, Soviet bear that had one claw in Cuba and then another paw reaching over toward Argentina and really warning that Argentina could be next.

[Rachel Newman]

So a good incentive for folks listening to also buy the book. Look at some of those fascinating images. So maybe the tensest part of the Cuban Missile Crisis comes right before it actually ends. And we know that the ending isn't nuclear war. And as we would expect, many people are relieved about this outcome, including Che Guevara, which I thought was a really poignant, almost cinematic story. But your book shows us too, that, you know, alongside relief, there are many people who are very disappointed about the way everything played out, even if they're not worried about nuclear apocalypse anymore. What's the nature of these disappointments Latin Americans are feeling?

[Renata Keller]

So a lot of Latin Americans had seen the missile crisis as their best opportunity to get rid of Fidel Castro. They saw it as this clear example that Castro had crossed a line, that he had invited Soviet intervention in the Americas, that he had risked everyone's security. And they said if. If clearly he needs to be removed. And he. And they thought that the quarantine would be the first step in an invasion of Cuba and the eventual removal of Fidel Castro. And then when Kennedy pledged not to attack Castro anymore and to not support any of his allies in Latin America in their attacks against Castro, Latin American leaders, especially in the Caribbean Basin, were arguing, sure, the missiles are gone, but Castro's threat is still there, and you just strengthened him. And so they were appalled, and they were really critical of Kennedy's decision and his. His pledge not to attack Cuba anymore. They said, you're strengthening the greatest threat to our security.

[Rachel Newman]

And what about folks in Cuba? How do they feel about the way this crisis ends?

[Renata Keller]

They were also pretty upset. They felt betrayed by the Soviets, especially because Nikita Khrushchev hadn't bothered to incorporate them or to include them in the negotiations. He hadn't consulted them before removing the missiles. He hadn't even informed them about the fact that he'll be removing the missiles. They had to learn through the news that what was happening in their own country. And so a lot of Cubans felt really betrayed, really disrespected. They felt like they were being abandoned by their Soviet allies. And so there was a lot of anger and. And just disappointment in. In Cuba. They, I think, obviously were relieved that they weren't invaded and that there was no nuclear war. But they also never trusted the Soviet Union again to the same degree that they had before the Cuban Missile Crisis.

[Rachel Newman]

So zooming out this question, you know, not just to sort of the immediate reactions, but thinking a bit longer term, who do you see as either the people or the political movements or the States who end up being kind of the biggest winners or the biggest losers of the Cuban Missile Crisis, That's a great question.

[Renata Keller]

So it's hard to say. I'll give you one example of a country that could be interpreted as a big winner or a big loser, and that's Argentina. So Argentina, the government comes out of the crisis with much closer ties with the United States. The United States government was very grateful to Argentina for being so enthusiastically in support of the quarantine. They were grateful for Argentina for Argentine participation in the quarantine. And after the crisis, Argentina and the United States sign a mutual assistance program in which the United States gives significantly greater amount of funding to help the Argentine army and military in general develop their capacities. And so some of the biggest winners are Argentina's military and one general in specific, General Juan Carlos Ongania. He was the head of the Argentine army and he formed a 3,000 man battalion to be ready to send to the Caribbean in case there was an invasion of Cuba. And he personally established very close ties with leaders in the United States as a result of the missile crisis. And then he got further training in the United States. He continued to develop those ties in the following years. And then the Argentine government, they had had an interim government during the missile crisis. The democratically elected president had been overthrown in the spring, or rather not spring for Argentina there in the Southern hemisphere, but their president had been overthrown in March or April of 1962. And so they had an interim president. And then when they did eventually hold elections, a populist was elected, in part because of this wave of anti Americanism that happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis. There were a lot of acts of sabotage against US owned businesses. These pamphlets that I mentioned in which people were criticizing the Argentine government. And so a populist gets elected, and then the military in Argentina is not very happy with this populist government. And in 1966, Juan Carlos Anganilla, the US golden boy who had emerged with such close US ties after the crisis, he stages a military coup in 1966, which ushers in a period of multiple military coups for the next 20 years in Argentina. So I would argue that some people in Argentina were big winners of the crisis, but then the majority came out definitely losers of the Cuban muscle crisis.

[Rachel Newman]

Maybe you could say something as well about sort of the left in Latin America. Obviously that encompasses many, many different groups. But it seems that your book is saying that this was a blow to Latin America's many lefts.

[Renata Keller]

It was a blow. So before the missile crisis, a lot of people, like I mentioned, had looked to Cuba as an example, had been really inspired by the Cuban revolution. And then when they saw Castro sacrificing his sovereignty to the Soviets, and they saw him being abandoned by the Soviet Union, they were really disillusioned with both Cuba and the Soviet Union. So a lot of people across in all these various leftist movements across Latin America were left a little bit adrift in some ways, not knowing where to look for any sort of external support. And they kind of had to decide, like, are, are we on our own? Can we look to China maybe, or can we work together without Cuba? Cuba had been the center of leftist organizing in the years following the Cuban Revolution. And so the left in Latin America really had to recalibrate their strategies and, and their alliances and almost their identity to say, so sue, who are we and you know, what are our main goals in terms of our strategy and pursuing security and pursuing change in our home countries? And so it was a really powerful moment of reckoning for the Latin American left.

[Rachel Newman]

So connecting your book with our present moment, it seems to me that the three S's you identify, security, sovereignty and solidarity, that they remain very relevant and very controversial topics when we're talking about the Western Hemisphere. But what I'm not so sure about, and I'd love to hear what you think about this, do you feel that these sort of terms, that their meanings have changed or the controversies are different, or are you seeing kind of more continuity when you're reading news about inter American relations today?

[Renata Keller]

I see a lot of continuity in terms of issues of security and sovereignty. I think a lot of the rhetoric around drug trafficking and around Venezuela has really focused on issues of security, both in terms of hemispheric security, but also in terms of like protecting the United States from drug traffickers. That idea. And I think this same debate about sovereignty, about whether the United States has the right to intervene in Venezuela or in other parts of Latin America is still very relevant. What I see that has changed significantly is this idea of solidarity. And I think especially the Trump administration has zero interest in solidarity, in either cultivating it among Latin American allies or in respecting it or showing it with anyone else. And so I think that part was really important during the Cold War, that piece of it. And this idea of working together and supporting other people in other parts of the world, I think that in recent years has disappeared, much to our detriment.

[Rachel Newman]

I learned so much from your book and from this conversation. So thanks so much to Renata Keller for joining us today to speak about her new book, the Fate of the the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Hemispheric Col.