And that is my bad, as I'm right now reading a book about the history of the KGB. At the point I am in the book, 1960 or so, they are busy trying to overthrow the government in Mexico.

There is a difference. Moscow was using Mexicans they had trained for some time in Russia and North Korea. The author points out the Soviets didn't trust anyone they couldn't completely control. And clearly Castro wasn't about to kiss their ass at that time.

I'd never thought about outside support for the Castro revolution. Even a modest revolution in a small country would take enormous resources. Training facilities, money, people, communication, coordination, etc. Any ideas as to who provided those?

As I remember, Guevara was killed in Bolivia. Someone had to be sponsoring him there.

(And speaking of Bolivia, a friend of mine was in the Peace Corps in Bolivia for 3 years. He was dynamited out of one village after a year, got permission to stay another full term in another village. His village was at 13,500 feet and incredibly poor. The only source of cash in the area was was working in copper mines at 20,000 feet, where people could make 25 cents a day, cash. Unfortunately the people who went up there to work all died before age 35. The mines in those days were owned by American companies. There was a very, very strong communist movement among the workers, which seems understandable. Nationalizing them should have been a popular idea.)

If it wasn't the Soviets, and there's no evidence it was the Chinese, who is left? The North Koreans?

Arf