A Sergeant Named Batista

Chapter 24

'When Batista completed his term as Constitutional President and left Cuba in 1944, a great many persons, particularly his political enemies, predicted that his career as a statesman was ended. Perhaps their private hopes had something to do with their public predictions. Nevertheless, there were a number of Cubans who thought that Batista's political sun had set.

Generally speaking, these were the same people who had been making bad guesses about Batista for years. They had made a sort of career out of being wrong and they were the same people who, in September, 1933, after the Revolt of the Sergeants, predicted that Batista would be shot before a firing squad for his "mutinous act" of overthrowing the Céspedes government.

It is true that Batista is somewhat of an unpredictable individual. He doesn't conform to the established pattern in political affairs any more than he conformed to the established pattern of the humble cane cutter when still a barefooted boy in Oriente Province. If Batista were the kind of person who always conformed, his name wouldn't mean a thing outside Cuba and there would be no reason for writing about him. Furthermore, the history of Cuba would not be quite so interesting had the country not produced such a colorful character as Fulgencio Batista.

It has always seemed a bit strange to me that so many Cuban politicians and statesmen have been so busy criticizing Batista that they haven't had time to study the early life of the man who has figured so sensationally in the affairs of the Republic.

One would think that if not patriotism, then ordinary curiosity would cause these public personages to go back and look at the antecedents of this boy who came from a remote cane field in Oriente Province to a position of prominence in world affairs in such a short period of time. Perhaps if they took the time to investigate his past, they would find something which would explain the genius or the lack of it in this former sergeant.

No nation, large or small, can ignore a man who in the course of twenty years, has overthrown two governments and twice occupied the Presidency of the Republic. So why not try to learn more about him? If, in checking the early life of Batista, they found more basis for their criticism, their attacks on him would be much more effective. If, on the other hand, they found some virtue, some manifestation of sincere patriotism in the man, some indication of his fitness for the important role he has played in the affairs of his country, they might, as good patriots, cease the calumnious attacks against him and start supporting him in some of his official undertakings.

Those of us who have been privileged to live with the Cuban people over a period of years have a very high regard for their integrity and for their fair-minded approach to things. They are a progressive, exceptionally intelligent people, and they believe in and practice fair play in their daily lives. They are very tolerant, and this particular virtue is responsible to a great extent for the tendency among Cuban politicians to attack a public figure unmercifully, without supporting their charges with facts. Among a less tolerant people, a politician who shouts insults and violent charges against a man in public office would be compelled to provide proof to support his charges. This same tolerance has also brought a distorted interpretation of the rights of free speech. It is common practice in Cuba for a politician to use the radio, television, or the press to malign his opponents in a manner which would be thoroughly illegal in other democracies. In Cuba a speaker can vilify a public figure, then justify his own actions with the simple claim that he is exercising his rights under the constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech, and the Cuban public will accept his interpretation of that right.

For months following the return of Batista to power in 1952 , his political opponents carried on a series of attacks against him, and most of the charges were based on nothing more substantial than hearsay. There were many instances in which the attacker, using radio or television, opened his tirade by charging flatly that Batista had imposed an atrocious dictatorship on the country and that the people were denied the right of free speech. Once the speaker bad established the premise-made the charge that the nation was being strangled by a Batista dictatorship-he would devote the next half-hour to a violent denunciation of Batista, his government, and all his friends and relatives. It never occurred to the attacker that the very fact that he was permitted to make such unsubstantiated, derogatory charges against Batista and his government was proof positive that no such dictatorship actually existed. Had the attacker lived under a dictatorship, he never would have had access to the air to make such inflammatory, anti-government speeches.

One of the easiest ways to start an argument in Cuba is to bring up the name of Batista. Almost everyone has an opinion about the man, but, unfortunately, almost everybody's opinion is influenced by the individual's emotions. The ones who admire Batista admire him with great fervor. Those who dislike him, dislike him with just as much ardor. I don't believe many Cubans have tried to appraise the man objectively. Not many of them, I am sure, have put aside their personal feelings and tried to weigh the good qualities of Batista against the bad in an attempt to get a better concept of the man's character, his personality, and his qualifications.

If they made such a dispassionate appraisal, they would find that despite Batista's unpredictability, despite his habit of surprising peoples and governments, there are certain things in his life which are constant. They would find, I am sure, that he is intelligent, sincere, courageous, a born revolutionary, a natural leader, and a superb strategist. Certainly no one can deny that he is intelligent. His superior intelligence has been evident in all his public acts. Nor can there be any doubt about his courage. No one could have overthrown two governments in the Batista manner without great personal courage. His leadership and his ability as a political as well as a revolutionary strategist are too well known to be the subject of argument.

An impartial study of Batista's record as a public figure will show that regardless of the fact that he has staged two successful insurrections, be has exercised a stabilizing influence on his country in times of national nervousness. That was true in September, 1933, and it was true in March, 1952. A few months after he came into power in the revolution of March, 1952, even Cubans who disagreed with some of his governmental actions admitted that if he were to abandon suddenly the authority in Cuba, the country would be thrown into another period of political and economic instability. And they agreed that there seemed to be no immediate answer to the question: "After Batista, what?"

The point on which most Cubans disagree is the question of Batista's patriotism. His enemies insist that he is selfish, that he is motivated in many of his actions by ambition and self-interest, whether it be material or spiritual. On the other hand, the people who know him intimately, those who have seen him fret and worry about the plight of his country, believe that Batista in his entire career has never taken a step without first convincing himself that it was for the good of Cuba. What motive other than patriotism, they ask, would have inspired him to risk his life to lead the revolution of March, 1952? At that point in his life Batista had achieved the highest honors of his land, he had enough of the material things of life to allow him to live comfortably, and he had an exceptionally happy home life. Certainly there were no obviously materialistic reasons for his actions in March, 1952, his friends point out, so the inspiration which sent him out to take over the Army, Navy, and, in fact, the entire country, with only a dozen young men to support him, must have been patriotism.

One of Batista's best assets is his personality. His personal charm gives him great powers of persuasion, and the ability to persuade is an important requisite for any man who wants to lead men or lead a nation. I have seen men come to Batista with anger in their hearts to protest some action of the government, convinced that Batista had contrived to hurt them or their business interests. The moment these men came face to face with Batista they succumbed to his charm and warmth and sat down to discuss their problems dispassionately. I have been with him when reporters who were outspokenly anti-Batista came to him to get data with which to attack him and his government. I have never seen one of them who didn't feel the effects of his personality and leave the interview with a feeling of friendliness for the man he had previously planned to attack.

The element of surprise, which Batista has used so successfully in his revolutionary activities, is an attractive feature of the man's personality. His friends are frequently surprised by a call from Batista's home in the middle of the night, with an invitation to come over and discuss a few matters over a cup of coffee. Early in the spring of 1953, when Cuba was celebrating the hundredth anniversary of the birth of José Martí, the nation's greatest hero, Batista called me at my home in Havana one evening and asked me to have a light supper with him in the library at his farm. I joined a small group, including General Tabernilla, Chief of the Army, and several others. We ate cold fried chicken and then settled down to a round of small talk. It was a relaxing period for Batista between official appearances at Martí celebrations. He was to make his major address of the Martí festivities the following morning at ten o'clock.

After midnight the talk was running thin and Batista stepped to a table in his library and opened a large edition of the Bible. He started to read aloud. He read well and we all listened. He continued for almost an hour, digressing once in a while to give his own interpretation of some of the things he had read. When he finished be let us know our visit was over. It was two o'clock in the morning and Batista announced that he was ready to start writing the speech for his ten o'clock appearance.

I asked him why he read the Bible and he told me that he read it for several reasons. First, it was fine literature, second, it relaxed him, and third, he found that reading the Bible aloud gave him inspiration for the speeches he wrote.