> Can you point to some less biased source than the US military? Yes. I called the 1934 document a lease, but it was actually a treaty that also included a mo

> Can you point to some less biased source than the US military? Yes. I called the 1934 document a lease, but it was actually a treaty that also included a modified form of the earlier lease's provisions. In 1934, a new Cuban-American Treaty of Relations, reaffirming the lease, granted Cuba and its trading partners free access through the bay, modified the lease payment from $2,000 in U.S. gold coins per year to the 1934 equivalent value of $4,085 in U.S. dollars, and made the lease permanent unless both governments agreed to break it, or until the U.S. abandoned the base property. [1] United States - Cuban Agreements and Treaty of 1934 [2] Cuban–American Treaty of Relations (1934) Yale Law School, Lillian Goldman Law Library [3] Cuban–American Treaty of Relations (1934) [4] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guant%C3%A1namo_Bay https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guant%C3%A1namo_Bay [2] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_-_Cuban_Agreements_and_Treaty_of_1934 https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_-_Cuban_Agreeme... [3] https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/dip_cuba001.asp https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/dip_cuba001.asp [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban%E2%80%93American_Treaty_of_Relations_(1934) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban%E2%80%93American_Treaty_...