Cuban Missile Crisis: the 3 most surprising things you didn't know

Fifty years ago, the Cuban Missile Crisis brought the United States and the Soviet Union within a hair’s breadth of nuclear war. Here are three things that many Americans don’t know about what historians routinely call “the most dangerous moment in human history.”

2. Fidel Castro was pushing for nuclear annihilation of the US

This revelation came during a conference convened in 1989 with Soviets and Americans to learn the lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was then that Sovietologist Bruce Allyn, former director of Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School-Soviet Joint Study on Crisis Prevention, was confronted with a bombshell during a lunch break of Pepsi and Russian beet salad.

He was sitting with McNamara and Sergei Khrushchev, son of the Soviet leader, who had transcribed his father Nikita’s uncensored memoirs. Dr. Allyn, author of the new book on the Cuban Missile Crisis, “The Edge of Armageddon,” recalls that “Sergei leaned forward and quietly said, ‘I just wanted you to know that Castro wanted to launch a preemptive strike against the US.’ ”

The younger Khrushchev provided proof in his father’s uncensored memoirs. The plea for a nuclear strike came in a cable from Castro to Khrushchev, which warned that a US invasion of Cuba was imminent and urged Soviets to fire their nuclear missiles preemptively at the US.

Castro wrote: “If [the imperialists] actually carry out the brutal act of invading Cuba in violation of international law and morality, that would be the moment to eliminate such danger forever through an act of clear and legitimate defense, however harsh and terrible the solution would be, for there is no other.”

The cable left the elder Khrushchev in “utter shock,” Allyn recounts. In his uncensored memoirs, Nikita Khrushchev reported his own reaction: “Is he proposing that we start a nuclear war? This is insane.”

2 of 3

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.