The Cuban Missile Crisis was a 13-day confrontation in October 1962 between the United States and Soviet Union that brought the world to the brink of nuclear war. It’s widely considered the closest the Cold War came to escalating into a full-scale nuclear conflict. I was eight years old at the time and living in the heartland of Madison, Wisconsin. While my mother got her graduate degrees at the University of Wisconsin, I attended Spring Harbor Elementary School. I was struggling my way through the fourth grade since I had skipped second grade at the school’s behest and had dragged myself through the third grade without the benefit yet of much-needed eyeglasses. It was in September, 1962 that I was fitted with spectacles and the world suddenly became clearer to me…including my classroom blackboard, which I could barely see up to that point. How strange to think that as the world was teetering on the precipice of nuclear annihilation, I was looking around in dismay at all that had gone unseen to me before my glasses.
The crisis began when American U-2 spy planes discovered Soviet medium-range ballistic missiles under construction in Cuba on October 14, 1962. These missiles could reach much of the continental United States within minutes, dramatically altering the nuclear balance of power. Of course, that’s the American perspective and least we forget, the United States had deployed Jupiter intermediate-range ballistic missiles (IRBMs) to Turkey in 1961, about a year before the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Jupiter missiles were part of NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangement and were deployed to Turkey and Italy as a response to the growing Soviet nuclear threat in Europe. The deployment to Turkey was particularly significant because these missiles could reach targets deep within the Soviet Union, including major cities like Moscow. The Jupiter missiles were liquid-fueled, medium-range ballistic missiles with a range of about 1,500 miles. While considered advanced for their time, they were also vulnerable – they took time to fuel and launch, making them potentially easy targets in a first strike scenario. It’s tough being a bully if you get tangled up in your own underwear.
President John F. Kennedy was informed about the Cuban missiles on October 16, 1962 and immediately convened a group of advisors called ExComm (Executive Committee of the National Security Council). After intense deliberation, Kennedy announced a naval “quarantine” (avoiding the word “blockade,” which would have been an act of war) of Cuba on October 22. The crisis was resolved on October 28 when Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles from Cuba in exchange for a public US pledge not to invade Cuba and the secret removal of US Jupiter missiles from Turkey (revealed years later). From the Soviet perspective, having American nuclear missiles so close to their border was extremely provocative. This deployment was one of the factors that motivated Khrushchev’s decision to place Soviet missiles in Cuba – he saw it as evening the strategic balance and giving the USSR the same kind of close-range nuclear threat that the US had established in Turkey. During the Cuban Missile Crisis negotiations, the secret agreement to remove the Jupiter missiles from Turkey was crucial to resolving the standoff. However, this removal was kept secret at the time to avoid the appearance that the US had made concessions under pressure. The missiles were quietly withdrawn from Turkey in April 1963, about six months after the crisis ended. This deployment and subsequent removal illustrated the complex nuclear chess game of the Cold War era. The crisis led to improved US-Soviet communications, including the establishment of the Moscow-Washington hotline, and contributed to the Limited Test Ban Treaty of 1963. It demonstrated both the dangers of nuclear brinkmanship and the possibility of rational compromise even in extreme circumstances.
There have been several nuclear crises and close calls since the Cuban Missile Crisis, though none quite reached the same level of sustained, public confrontation between superpowers. Perhaps the most dangerous post-Cuba incident was Able Archer 83 (November 1983). This NATO military exercise simulating nuclear warfare was so realistic that some Soviet leaders believed it was cover for an actual first strike. Soviet nuclear forces were placed on high alert, and the situation was extremely tense until the exercise concluded. Then there was the Kargil Conflict in 1999. During this limited war between India and Pakistan, Pakistan reportedly readied its nuclear arsenal, making it the first nuclear crisis between two nuclear-armed nations since the superpowers. The Standoff in Kashmir (2001-2002), following a terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament, saw India and Pakistan mobilize nearly a million troops along their border. Both nations’ nuclear forces were reportedly on heightened alert for months. While there have been other incidents and nuclear systems glitches, the next big threat was in Iraq.
The 2003 Iraq invasion was officially justified primarily on claims about weapons of mass destruction (WMDs), including nuclear weapons, though these claims proved to be unfounded. The Bush administration’s main arguments for invasion included claims that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons and had active WMD programs. Intelligence agencies claimed Iraq was trying to acquire uranium from Niger (later discredited). There were allegations about aluminum tubes being used for uranium enrichment (disputed by experts), and claims about mobile biological weapons labs and chemical weapons stockpiles. There were also references to Iraq’s past nuclear program, which had been dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War. Of course, as we all know now, there was no active nuclear weapons program and no significant WMD stockpiles.
What is it about that part of the world, called on maps, the Iranian Plateau, running from the Tigris/Euphrates Valley to the Punjab? Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India. This was one of the centers of modern civilization and yet it seems incapable of anything resembling civilized existence. Once again, is that our ethnocentric perspective? We did intervene to kick the shit out of Iraq because we disliked its autocratic leader. But then Iran and Iraq and Pakistan and India are not exactly friendly bedfellows either. And you cannot even blame this on dramatic religious differences. Christian v. Jew, Jew v. Muslim, Muslim v. Hindu. Even the Muslims fight each other. The two major branches of Islam, the Sunni and Shia (Shi’a), split early in Islamic history over questions of leadership and religious authority. Sunnis believe that the first four caliphs after Prophet Muhammad were rightfully chosen leaders. Shias believe that Ali ibn Abi Talib, Muhammad’s cousin and son-in-law, should have been the immediate successor. They follow a line of divinely appointed leaders called Imams. Iran is the largest Shia-majority country, with significant populations in Iraq, Lebanon, and Bahrain. The Sunni-Shia divide has influenced Islamic theology, law, politics, and regional conflicts throughout history, though the vast majority of theological and practical aspects of Islam are shared between the branches.
And now another Iranian drama is playing out with Israel preempting an anti-nuclear strike against Iran now that its proxies (Hammas, Hezbolah and the Huthis) have been contained. Once again, America is center stage on this precipice since our weaponry dominates all others and we are being asked to intervene with Israel to finally put Iran in its place, a place that has been a global outlier since the fundamentalist revolution in 1979. Some thought JFK was not up to the challenge of nuclear confrontation in 1962. Many more are worried about Trump’s stability in the role of nuclear arbiter at this moment of tension. Right now he has given the world a two-week reprieve while he ponders his options, finger poised over the rhetorical “button”. I wish I could remember what the calm before the storm felt like in 1962. I’m betting it felt a lot like this.