History of U.S.-Cuba Turmoil and the Possibility of a Full-Scale War!
Fidel Castro and his men in the Sierra Maestra – Public Domain
(Personal note: I have studied the Cuban revolution and taught about and been in solidarity with Cuba since the late 1960’s. I have visited five times including living there with my family for four months and teaching Cuban faculty at the University of Havana in 2001. I took a class from the Evergreen State College to Cuba for eight weeks in 2004, traveling through the entire island, and have also visited more recently. I keep in touch with a few friends there. Peter)
The Trump administration is serious about overthrowing the Cuban government and its political economic structure. What can be done to stop it?
On Mayday, 2026, Trump signed an executive order authorizing additional sanctions on financial institutions and other corporations from around the world trading or investing in Cuba. Trump said, “We will be taking it (Cuba) over almost immediately.” In response, the Cuba President said, “No aggressor, no matter how powerful will find surrender in Cuba.” If Trump were to attack the country, Miguel Diaz-Canel said, “he will find a people determined to defend sovereignty and independence in every inch of our country”.
This follows the Trump administration’s April 14th directive to the Pentagon to “ramp up preparations for possible military action against Cuba.” Trump told reporters the day before that “we may stop by Cuba after we’ve finished with this” (this referring to war against Iran). This followed a January 29th Executive Order calling Cuba “an unusual and extraordinary threat” to US national security”. As part of this, Trump announced a blockade of oil to Cuba and stiff tariffs for any country delivering oil to Cuba with US warships around it. The two main suppliers had been Mexico and Venezuela. They and other nations have stopped shipping oil to Cuba except one big shipment by Russia in late March of this year.
The U.S., while threatening an invasion and assassination of its leaders and/or bombing of Cuba is already conducting an act of war by this blockade. This is both a continuation of the 66-year-old U.S embargo of Cuba and a further tightening and escalation. There is an increased U.S. military presence in the Caribbean, and the U.S. continues to have a naval base at Guantanamo on Cuban soil.
The lack of Cuban access to oil is causing increased blackouts and shortages of food and serious declines in the health care system. The Cuban health care system until recently provided universal and quality health care to the entire population. The objective of the Trump administration is to cause so much hardship and suffering among the Cuban people that they revolt against their government and cause its collapse. This is Trumpism’s preferred strategy. It is inhumane, illegal and immoral. It probably won’t succeed as the Cuban state retains legitimacy especially against the U.S. and there is limited opposition within the Cuban military and the Communist Party against the leadership. Still, an actual military attack by the U.S. is a possibly. Let us not let it happen!
The Cuban Revolution led by Fidel Castro overthrew the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista on January 1, 1959. In spring 1960 President Eisenhower signed an order calling for the overthrow of the Cuban government, which has been the policy of the U.S. for most of the last 66 years.
Why?
From the 1960s through the 1980s, the threat of Cuba to the U.S. ruling class was the threat of a good example. The threat of a good example means that Cuba meeting the needs of its people would inspire anti-capitalist revolutions in the global south, what used to be called the Third World. These societal transformations would reduce or end the possibility of U.S. corporations exploiting the labor and profiting from the minerals and food production of these countries. Supporting corporate capital is a major determinant of U.S. foreign and military policy. In the early 1960s Cuba did a major land reform and nationalized U.S. owned property such as the sugar mills, mines and hotels. Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution were popular throughout the Americas for standing up to the United States, for their universal health and educational system, their internationalism and for their support of revolutionary movements.
The Soviet Union had provided oil at low prices and bought Cuban sugar at above the world market price. This contributed to a slow improvement in access to consumer goods with a major decline in poverty from the 1960s to the late 1980s. Life expectancy and infant mortality reached global north levels, basic needs were met and access to education increased substantially, especially for women and in rural areas. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990-1991, Cuba has had serious economic problems. A major cause has been their inability to export sufficiently to cover their import needs, i.e., a continuing deficit in the balance of payments. Beginning in the 1990s, tourism became a major earner of foreign exchange, but tourism declined substantially during the Covid epidemic and has not recovered. Cuba overinvested in tourism infrastructure. After the victory of Hugo Chavez as President of Venezuela in 1998, Venezuela exchanged their oil for Cuban doctors and medicine and advisers in agriculture and security. This partially replaced Soviet support.
The U.S. had claimed falsely that Cuba was a Soviet outpost 90 miles from Miami and therefore a threat to the U.S. That this was not the reason for U.S. aggression was made clear by the U.S. intensifying its embargo/blockade of Cuba via the Helms-Burton Act after the Soviet Union no longer existed. This act penalized foreign countries trading with Cuba, further restricting Cuban access to foreign markets. There was a loosening of the embargo, including restoring diplomatic relations and permitting some tourism, trade and remittances under President Obama. Trump, in his first term, reversed this. He further attempted to weaken Cuba’s economy by declaring it a country supporting terrorism, an act which further restricted Cuba’s access to credit and global finance. There has been a large out migration for economic reasons from Cuba. in the last six years, the population has declined by 1.5 million to 10.9 million people. Infant mortality more than doubled between 2018 and 2025.
The U.S. embargo/sanctions have been the major cause of Cuba’s economic problems although not the only one. Cuba has not developed an economy where the standard of living increases steadily nor provides sufficient food production. Its development of organic agriculture beginning in the special period in the early 1990’s is impressive but has not ended Cuba’s reliance on food imports. In most sectors of the Cuban economy, productivity growth has been slow. Top-down central planning is a problem and increasing reliance on private markets has not helped. More worker control of enterprises would help as would participatory economic planning.
Although Cuba no longer poses the threat of a good example, its “crime” continues to be its independence from U.S. domination; that is, its refusal to accept U.S. determination of its economy and politics. Trump’s National Security Strategy document of December 2025 makes explicit what has shaped much of US policy beginning with the 1824 Monroe Doctrine—U.S. domination of Latin America. This new document claims the right of the U.S. to force the economic system of Cuba and other counties to become neoliberal, one that favors private enterprise and the opening of its economy to unrestricted U.S. corporate investment, goods, services and finance. This is being called the Donroe Doctrine, a combination of Donald Trump and the Monroe Doctrine. It is overt imperialism. Accepting this economic counterrevolution has been the demand of the United States in recent negotiations with Cuba. Cuba has rejected this demand and the demand for the replacement of Cuba’s President, Miguel Diaz-Canel.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio has made explicit the U.S. commitment to regime change in Cuba. One of the Trump administration’s motives in invading Venezuela on January 3, 2026, was as a step towards the attack on Cuba and to cut off Cuba’s oil supply from Venezuela. The U.S. military met little overt resistance in this immoral and illegal brief invasion that included the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and Cilia Flores and the killing of 130 people.
Cuba Today: Crisis and Support
A major problem of today’s Cuba is earning enough foreign exchange to purchase oil as it only produces one third of its energy needs. The lack of energy is causing continual electricity blackouts which causes further reductions in tourism, a reduced ability to do surgeries, reduced hours of hospital and schools, lower production, reduced water quality, decreased food production and increased spoilage. Gasoline is selling at $40 a gallon. Cuba is responding with major increases in renewable energy, receiving increased numbers of solar panels and batteries both as gifts from China and buying others. Solar energy now produces ¼ of Cuba’s energy needs and that percentage is growing rapidly but is not a short-run solution.
Cuba has earned foreign exchange and provided high quality health care to people in the global south by sending Cuban doctors and nurses, teaching foreign medical student and setting up clinics. The U.S. has put pressure, especially in the Americas, on countries to end these agreements and expel Cuban doctors. Nine countries, mainly in Central America and the Caribbean, have bowed to these pressures. This increases Cuba’s balance of payments crisis. Mexico and Brazil have reiterated their continued support for Cuban doctors as an important part of their health care system.
In Cuba’s struggle against the United States, Cuba has support from most governments around the world and their people. The latest vote in the UN against the US embargo of Cuba was 165 to 7. This was the 33rd consecutive year condemning the U.S. Mexico has recently sent over 800 tons of aid, mainly food and medical equipment. The leaders of Spain, Brazil and Mexico recently met and pledged substantial humanitarian aid and made a joint statement demanding respect for Cuban sovereignty and criticized Donald Trump’s threats “to take or invade Cuba.” A recent U.S. Senate vote to restrict Trump from military action against Cuba lost by only four votes, 51 to 47. The resolution included in its definition of military action, the oil blockade. On May 2nd, 800 delegates from 36 countries met in Havana and denounced the tightening of the US embargo, the US threats and called for global mobilization against the embargo. This support and solidarity are important but neither sufficient to significantly reduce the economic hardships facing the Cuban people nor stop the U.S. commitment to overthrow the Cuban government.
Even though support by the Cuban people for the Communist Paty and its leadership has declined, especially among younger people, there is little support for a U.S.-led overthrow or for a government led by right wing Cuban exiles. Unlike Venezuela, there are not leaders in the Communist Party or in the Cuban military, which is powerful, militarily and economically, who are likely to support an overthrow of the current leadership and structure. The U.S. may kidnap or assassinate Cuban leaders, a war crime, but that is unlikely to lead to a U.S. puppet regime. A U.S. invasion and bombing would create further economic misery and deaths but would be met by mass resistance by the military and population. The U.S. inability to get a quick military victory in Iran may make the Trump administration reluctant to directly attack Cuba although it is a possibility.
During the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s, brigades from over 50 countries went to support the Spanish Republic and the Spanish Left against the fascists. In the U.S., almost 3000 joined the Abraham Lincoln Brigade as part of that endeavor. They didn’t stop Franco’s victory in Spain but raised global awareness of the fascist threat to the world. Such solidarity is needed again for Cuba. In West Asia, challenging the Israeli and U.S. military but not using arms are flotillas such as the Global Sumud flotilla that have courageously sailed towards Gaza. Similarly, there was the recent flotilla bringing supplies to Cuba.
Solidarity with Cuba means solidarity with their government, people and organizations. In Iran we should do what we can to stop the US and Israeli war on Iran and support the Iranian people but not the Iranian government because of its brutal repression. This is different from Cuba. Here we should not only oppose U.S. aggression against Cuba and the Cuban people but critically support the Cuban government led by the Cuban Communist Party. Their history both domestically and internationally merits solidarity. There continues to be a commitment by the Cuban government to provide a social safety net to the entire population despite the scarcity of goods and energy.
What Can We Do!
As mentioned, Cuba was dealing with an economic crisis even before the tightening of the embargo this January (2026). Washington’s threat of high tariffs on countries selling oil to Cuba is new. The ongoing embargo of Cuba for 66 years has been a bipartisan strategy. An important demand that is necessary for the recuperation of the Cuban economy is to end all aspects of the U.S. sanctions/embargo/blockade —no restrictions on trade, on credit and financial flows, on tourism and for diplomatic relations with Cuba; i.e., respect for Cuban sovereignty. Also, no sanctions on other nations for normal relations with Cuba! The U.S. owes huge reparations to Cuba for its embargo and attacks on Cuba. A UN report in 2023 estimated trillions of dollars in damages to the Cuban economy by the U.S. embargo since 1960, taking inflation into account. Other estimates put the cost at one trillion dollars or more. End the Embargo!
Like the majority opposition here in the United States to the U.S.-Israeli War against Iran, our task is to turn passive opposition against war with Cuba into active opposition. A poll by YouGov, released yesterday, May 6th, finds 64 percent of Americans oppose the US going to war against Cuba, while 15 percent support it and 21 percent are not sure. We need a larger and more powerful anti-war movement. locally and nationally, that opposes U.S. attacks on Iran and Cuba, on boats in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific Ocean, demands an end to ongoing threats against and control of Venezuela and other nations, and other forms of U.S. interference. This needed anti-war movement should also actively oppose militarism and nuclear war and organize and mobilize against the continuing U.S. military aid and support of Israel for its genocidal war on Gaza, its illegal occupation of the West Bank and annexation of East Jerusalem and against Israel’s occupation and war against Lebanon, all aided by U.S. weapons and other support. One path forward could be building on the existing infrastructure of the ongoing Palestine solidarity movement in the U.S. and broadening it. While continuing to oppose all aid to Israel and solidarity with Palestine, it could also become a broader anti-war movement. This is necessary although not yet emerging on and off college campuses. Another possibility would be building a justice and no war mass organization and/or coalition that furthered equity and justice both at home and abroad.
Also urgent is that in all our daily lives in our communities, family, workplaces, and unions, churches, schools and organizations, political parties and activism, we raise the demand of no attack on Cuba, and the ending of all aspects of the embargo. This can include conversations, resolutions, lobbying Congress and making Cuban solidarity a part of forums, rallies, demonstrations, direct action, etc. It means connecting opposition to the war on Cuba to issues such as immigrant and economic justice in the U.S. Ending the blockade against Cuba will reduce Cuban migration to the U.S., although we should support their right to migrate.
Stopping U.S. attacks on Cuba is difficult but possible. Opposition by other countries and global solidarity is necessary. Let us also in our actions and words build a strong enough opposition here that those in power whether Democrat or Republican will understand it is in their interest to accept Cuban sovereignty and end all aspects of the attacks on Cuba.
Si Se Puede!
Under the Hammer: The 30-Year Career
Diplomat Who Has Become Rubio’s
Provocateur in Cuba
May 11, 2026
Mike Hammer. Photo: US State Department.
Mike Hammer is not your average diplomat. Built more like an SEC football coach than a statesman, Hammer sticks out like a sore thumb on his trips across the island. He was appointed as the ad interim Chargé d’affaires under Biden but has since grown close with Marco Rubio. Hammer’s resumé includes positions at the National Security Council, Bureau of Public Affairs, National Defense University, State Department Operations Center, along with several diplomatic posts.
Hammer demonstrates a continuity in Cuba policy between the Biden and Trump regimes: in soothing tones of compassion for the “Cuban people,” he has advocated choking the island through tightening the blockade during both. He has recently felt emboldened to directly call for regime change. He openly meets with opposition groups and dissidents and flaunts his activities on social media, fanning the flames of a Cuban color revolution.
United States-Cuba relations are at their tensest point since perhaps the invasion of Playa Girón (aka Bay of Pigs). This tension has brought more stipulations for US diplomats in Cuba and vice-versa. Under the grip of the current US regime, Cuban diplomats are required to notify and be approved by the Department of State to visit anywhere from a local government official’s office to an agricultural facility.
Rubio announced this new requirement last year, the latest in a long line of restrictions constraining Cuban diplomats (during the “Interests Section period” (1977-2015), Cuban diplomats had to notify the State Department if they left the Capital Beltway). In Cuba, however, Hammer enjoys the luxuries afforded to the average diplomat in a friendly country.
Hammer (center) meeting with family members of Yosvany Garcia and Ramon Zamora, both dissidents arrested during the 2021 Cuban protests. Taken from Latin American Reports, which got the image from the US Embassy Instagram account.
He is what one can call an instigating victim, a dominant trend in the global right-wing hellscape; he creates conflict and then cries foul when he is condemned or rejected by Cubans. Hammer travels the island from Pinar del RÃo to Guantanamo encouraging dissidents and sowing division. He has also often been seen flashing an “L” hand signal representing “Libertad,” a gesture signalling support for regime change commonly used by right-wing exile communities. He is treated like a celebrity in Miami’s Cuban communities, but has also been permitted to parade around Cuba freely. At a Fourth of July Celebration in Havana last year, Hammer said he was praying “for Cuba to soon be free.”
When Colombian President Gustavo Petro called on US troops not to obey Trump’s orders last year, the US revoked his visa. Meanwhile, “unfree” Cuba permits Hammer to serve as a facilitator for Miami and Cuban dissident communities. It has warned him against supporting armed insurrectionist groups, but has no plans to expel him for continually ignoring its warnings. Article 41 of the Vienna Convention states, “Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of all persons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulations of the receiving State. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs of that State.” Hammer frequently violates these terms, but is left unpunished by Cuba. The most severe pushback he’s received came in the form of the following cartoon published in Granma
Titled “A Tale of Two Hammers,” the cartoon contrasts the fictional Private Investigator Mike Hammer with the sweaty, overweight diplomat. He is shown saying “I don’t think I’m right for the role!” Taken from Granma, June 2025.
Along with his support for repressive sanctions, Hammer’s blatant hostility toward the Cuban government also involves efforts to sabotage its international relations. In late February, Hammer visited Italy’s Calabrian region to pressure Region President Roberto Occhiuto to terminate its arrangement with the Cuban government, which has sent several hundred Cuban doctors in the last two years to help operate the region’s medical facilities. US efforts were futile; instead, Occhiuto pointed out that “the Cuban doctors who are making it possible to keep Calabria’s hospitals and emergency rooms open are still a necessity for our Region.” In fact, he added, 600 more doctors are needed, whether they be from Cuba, the US, or anywhere else.
While Cuba offers a vision of mutual progress, the US offers one of decay. Cuba exports health care professionals in exchange for cash and basic goods, while the US not only refused to help Calabria with its doctor shortage but worked to exacerbate it. The wealthiest country in the world maintains its status through intimidation and fear, while the blockaded island 90 miles to its south has designed its survival on a shared commitment to human development.
Hammer continues to rise as a star in Cuba’s “dissident” community. Anti-Communist activists describe him in saint-like terms as a brave man of the people who dares to visit parts of Cuba that even Cuban authorities disregard.
Exile media outlets like the Miami Herald and CiberCuba have obsessively covered what they claim are reprimands by the Cuban government against Hammer. In reality, these outlets underestimate the unpopularity of US-led regime change on the island. He facilitates exchange between exile groups accused of treason and publicly expresses support for US intervention, but plays the victim when the Cuban people publicly shame him. Most Cubans do not see themselves in the pale-faced gringo who claims to speak on behalf of their homeland.
Hammer also prioritizes meetings with Christian groups, such as the quickly growing Evangelical movement. These groups tend to be hubs for anti-Communist activities and have long had extensive links to Miami’s exile community. Former CIA agent and Cuban-American terrorist Luis Posada Carriles claimed Cuban American National Foundation leader Jorge Mas Canosa used the Church as cover for money transfers for Carriles’ Havana bombings during the 1990s. During the early 2000s, the Catholic Church served as a recognized partner in dialogue on human rights by the Cuban government, but the preceding 40-year history of animosity between organized Christianity and the Cuban Communist Party created “dissident” networks that still often see churches serving as hubs. Since late 2025, the Cuban Catholic Church has received more than $9 million in humanitarian aid from the United States, which serves to attract more Cubans into these networks. I do not mean to homogenize the Catholic Church and its presence on the island – in fact, the Catholic Church has been fairly neutral in its public statements on Cuba, and has long condemned the severity of the US blockade. Nevertheless, the US intends to curb the influence of the Cuban Communist Party and encourage right-wing actors in the Church. Hammer helped to oversee aid distribution and ensure the Cuban state was isolated from the process.
In March, Hammer was honored with the Cuban American Bar Association’s (CABA) Humanitarian Award, a mere two days after 10 exiles took a speedboat full of automatic weapons into Cuban waters. Maritza Lugo Fernández, the apparent “mastermind” behind the boat attacks, was honored at the same CABA gala in 2024. Last month’s terrorist attack by Miami exiles once again exposed the proximity of Cuban exile terror networks to the US State Department.
Hammer embodies the arrogance Cuba has grown accustomed to when dealing with the US. In 1901, following the independence of Cuba from Spain and the subsequent occupation of Cuba by the US, an amendment was added to the new Constitution that would become known as the Platt Amendment. The amendment granted the US the right to intervene in Cuban politics whenever it deemed necessary, allowed it to establish permanent military bases, forbade Cuba from signing sovereign treaties, and delegated authority over public finances to Washington. Over a century later, the US continues to wedge itself into Cuban affairs and strip away its sovereignty.
Rubio has argued Hammer represents the voice of the Cuban people. As Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla fired back, “He doesn’t even represent the voice of the American people.” The majority of Americans oppose US regime change, with less than a quarter wanting to use military force against Cuba. He represents the American ruling class and its quest to turn Cuba into a playground for US business interests, or perhaps another Little Saint James.
Don’t let Hammer’s photo ops fool you; he is no victim or ally of “Cuban self-determination.” He is but another lackey of a desperate empire.
No comments:
Post a Comment