Abyss: The Cuban Missile Crisis 1962

Product Information

From the #1 bestselling historian Max Hastings ‘the heart-stopping story of the missile crisis’ Daily Telegraph Overall, the lively prose – sometimes a bit too lively – keeps things rolling along. However, there are times when Hastings’s pose as a provocateur leads to internal contradictions. For example, he enjoys twitting the Americans over their insistence that sovereign Cuba could not be allowed to house nuclear missiles, even though Turkey hosted American Jupiter batteries. It is a point he insists upon at length. Hastings looks at the Crisis from all vantages – Cuban, Soviet, American, and European – in a balanced way without any obvious personal bias. For instance, the Soviets and many Europeans thought: We all have nukes on our doorsteps. What’s so terrible about America having them too? The Crisis is viewed by many as being “more political than strategic”. During the crisis, Robert McNamara contended that the fundamental issue at stake was political, not strategic or tactical. Hastings is in agreement with this, and provides some convincing analysis on this point: "three leaders and their nations marched towards a fateful rendezvous in the Caribbean, with hapless allies such as the British trailing behind. Fidel Castro was driven by a craving to secure for his small country a celebrity and importance to which it could lay claim only by promoting sensation and even outrage. Nikita Khrushchev cherished no desire for war, but was happy to use the threat of it as a means of asserting the Soviet Union's right to be viewed on the world stage as the equal of the United States. His conduct represented the negation of statesmanship but was, instead, the bitter fruit of the Russian experience since 1917, and arguably even before. Khrushchev probably recognized that he had little prospect of securing the love of his people, never mind that of his Presidium colleagues. However, he needed at least their respect, which he sought by presenting himself as standard-bearer for Russian greatness and socialist revolution. Unfortunately for the cause of peace, however, such a display mightily alarmed the peoples of the West, and especially Americans...John F. Kennedy was one of the most enlightened men ever to occupy the presidency of the United States. But his instinct towards moderation and compromise, fostered by sophistication and international experience, stood at odds with the conservative worldview of a substantial proportion of his fellow-countrymen, who demanded that America should be seen to be strong. Whereas Khrushchev, in making foreign policy decisions, was seldom obliged to consider a domestic public, as distinct from political, opinion, Kennedy could never neglect his own. His presidency, and above all his conduct of the approaching Crisis, would be characterized by a tension between personal rationality and a determination to be seen by his people to conduct himself in a fashion that did not injure his 1964 re-election prospects. The most frightening aspect of this was that more than a few Americans, especially those who wore uniforms with stars on their shoulders, were less fearful of war than was the rest of the planet." Hastings is a British writer, and so it’s not surprising that he affords some prominence to the UK position and the thoughts and actions of Prime Minister Harold Macmillan during the crisis. Kennedy obviously felt it important to keep Britain in the loop, though the impression this book gives is that he wasn’t expecting much in the way of useful strategic advice from that quarter. The overall effect is to show how unimportant the UK was to American thinking, despite the fact that the British expected to be wiped out as a modern society if nuclear war broke out. Such is life for junior alliance partners.

I wanted to read about the Cuban missile crisis for quite some time so the release of Max Hastings' The Abyss was perfect. Hastings does a fantastic job of telling the terrifying story of the crisis using both historical archives but also eye witness testimonies. Fourth, in 2022, we have worldwide data and video communications of almost unlimited capacity and immediacy. 1962 was the Stone Age in this regard. No meaningful real-time communication was possible with ships at sea. Communication, such as it was, was several hours in arrears. To send a message to Moscow, the Soviet embassy in the US had to handwrite, type, encrypt, dispatch by courier on a bicycle (!!) and wait. In effect, one-way transmission of a message between Washington and Moscow averaged 12 hours elapsed. The great deficiency in communication speed profoundly affected the course of the Crisis. (Don't feel smug: it's likely that the immediacy of today's comms would be open to abuse by malevolent parties, just in different ways). Kennedy had many, by now, well known and copiously documented faults.His willingness however, to refrain from the lethal and precipitate action pressed so hard upon him by his military advisors while he pursued a diplomatic solution, I believe, represents his ‘finest hour’. It is a strange paradox that so many of the men who performed so well during this crisis exercising cool nerves and sound judgement such as McNamara, Rusk, Bundy etc would be abandon such qualities and have their reputations destroyed and swallowed up by the quagmire of the Vietnam war just a few short years later. But, of course, it wasn’t and Max Hastings enthralling book tells how the world almost ended sixty years ago. JFK had ample opportunity to resort to military action, but staid his hand despite pressure from members of the Joint Chiefs and others. The president was the driver of debate and became more of an “analyst-in-chief.” He pressed his colleagues to probe the implications of any actions the United States would take and offer reasonable solutions to end the crisis. For JFK it seemed as if he was in a chess match with Khrushchev countering each of his moves and trying to offer him a way out of the crisis he precipitated.In between the meetings of great leaders and the movement of ships and submarines he added the recollections of regular Cuban and Russian people that were stationed in Cuba during the time of the crisis. These eye witnesses were interviewed for the book and they are a fantastic addition because they add a much needed ground level view.

Vladimir Putin’s ill-advised invasion of Ukraine last February has not produced the results that he expected. As the battlefield situation has degenerated for Russian army due to the commitment of the Ukrainian people and its armed forces, along with western assistance the Kremlin has resorted to bombastic statements from the Russian autocrat concerning the use of nuclear weapons. At this time there is no evidence by American intelligence that Moscow is preparing for that eventuality, however, we have learned the last few days that Russian commanders have discussed the possible use of tactical nuclear weapons. The conflict seems to produce new enhanced rhetoric on a daily basis, and the world finds itself facing a situation not seen since the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962 amidst the Cold War. The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis was the most perilous event in history, when mankind faced a looming nuclear collision between the United States and Soviet Union. During those weeks, the world gazed into the abyss of potential annihilation. the Cuban revolution from the early days of Castro and Che Guevara to the fall of the Batista regime.

BookBliss

Chapters 4 through 14 cover the Cuban Missile Crisis proper. I'm not going to summarise these. Enough to identify a few of the main themes of Sir Max Hastings. In an attempt to distance the US from the fiasco, President John F. Kennedy disingenuously wrote to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev the next day. ‘I have previously stated, and I repeat now, that the United States intends no military intervention in Cuba,’ Kennedy said. He urged the Soviets not to use the failed invasion as a pretext to foment unrest elsewhere in the world. In fact, it brought the proximity that was familiar to millions of Europeans directly to America’s approaches.

Bestselling author Max Hastings offers a welcome re-evaluation of one of the most gripping and tense international events in modern history—the Cuban Missile Crisis—providing a people-focused narrative that explores the attitudes and conduct of Russians, Cubans, Americans, and a terrified world that followed each moment as it unfolded. Obviously – as we do not yet inhabit a world of radioactive ash – the missiles of October never flew. Still, the margins were so thin, and the human element so pronounced, that it is unsurprising that this event has been the subject of numerous, sometimes excellent books. I have read more than a few of Sir Max Hastings's books and consider this to be one of his best. Some friends and family members might well be receiving a copy as a seasonal gift!

Sponsored

Occasionally, Hastings leaves the world leaders behind completely, to give us anecdotes from average individuals living through the Crisis, powerless observers in a high-stakes game they never joined. The sheer number of viewpoints presented adds richness and depth to the proceedings. Hastings recounts the history of the crisis from the viewpoints of national leaders, Soviet officers, Cuban peasants, American pilots and British peacemakers. Hastings, success as an author has always rested upon eyewitness interviews, archival work, tape recordings, and insightful analysis – his current work is no exception. The positions, comments, and actions of President John F. Kennedy, Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, and Fidel Castro among many other important personalities are on full display. The 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis is widely considered to be the closest the world has come to a full nuclear exchange. In a ploy apparently meant to taunt the United States, Soviet Premier Nikita Khruschev sent medium and intermediate range ballistic missiles to the Caribbean nation, along with enough atomic warheads to devastate America’s eastern seaboard. After ten years as editor and then editor-in-chief of The Daily Telegraph, he became editor of the Evening Standard in 1996. He has won many awards for his journalism, including Journalist of The Year and What the Papers Say Reporter of the Year for his work in the South Atlantic in 1982, and Editor of the Year in 1988.