David and Gulliver: 50 Years of Competing Metaphors in the Cuban-US Relationship

Philip Brenner and Soraya M. Castro Mariño

Mr. Manuel Mercado, My dearest brother: ...I am in daily danger of giving my

life for my country and duty for I understand that duty and have the courage to
carry it out – the duty of preventing the United States from spreading through the
Antilles as Cuba gains its independence, and from overpowering with that
additional strength our lands of America....I have lived in the monster and I know
its entrails; my sling is David's....—José Martí, Camp at Dos Rios, May 18, 18951

Reactionary solidarity exists in the world, and in all revolutions, the reactionary
classes have always tried to regain domination of a country with the support of the
international reactionaries. But in this case, it became a struggle between David
and Goliath: the struggle of a small people against the imperialist giant, whose
vast hands can reach the peoples of all of the continents of the world.—Fidel
Castro Ruz, Havana, January 2, 19612

I confess I was often tempted, while they were passing backwards and forwards
on my body, to seize forty or fifty of the first that came in my reach, and dash
them against the ground....I could not sufficiently wonder at the intrepidity of
these diminutive mortals, who durst venture to mount and walk upon my body,
while one of my hands was at liberty, without trembling at the very sight of so
prodigious a creature as I must appear to them. – Lemuel Gulliver in Gulliver’s
Travels3

But I want to lay one thing to rest. The notion that somehow the United States is
going to invade Cuba because there are troubles in Cuba is simply far-fetched and
it's simply not true. The United States wants to be a partner and a friend for the
Cuban people as they move through this period of difficulty and as the move
ahead.– Condoleezza Rice, August 6, 20064

There is little doubt that the enormous differences in size, power, and wealth of Cuba and
the United States have significantly shaped the relationship between the two countries since
1959.5 Cuba sees the United States from the perspective of a small power, and its leaders pay
close attention to every movement the United States makes. In contrast, the United States views
Cuba from the vantage point of a great power, and U.S. officials devote little time to fashioning
and implementing their Cuba policy unless there is a seeming crisis. This pattern is generally
common when a small power and a great power live in close proximity. In the particular case of
Cuba and the United States, their relationship has been influenced by what historian Louis A.
Perez, Jr. evocatively describes as “ties of singular intimacy” which were evident even before the
1898 U.S. intervention in the Cuban Independence War.6
Each country’s national narrative about the relationship has reflected the asymmetry.
Such narratives are the stories leaders use to evoke popular images. They may provide
uncomplicated explanations or justifications for policies, and they generally facilitate the pursuit
of a policy, because they tend to engender emotional responses. At some point, after they have