Cuba, an island nation of 11 million people, is reeling under the yoke of massive fuel shortages that have shaken almost every aspect of life.
The fueling of the humanitarian crisis is a direct result of a new aggressive approach by US President Donald Trump’s administration following the abduction of Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro by US forces. President Trump has gone far beyond Washington’s decades-old embargo on the island, threatening to impose crippling tariffs on any country providing fuel shipments, thereby curtailing lifeline supplies from Venezuela and Mexico.
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
But as the impact of U.S. policy on the lives of Cubans just 90 miles (145 kilometers) away in the U.S. state of Florida comes under increasing scrutiny, there is no similar clarity on what the Trump administration actually hopes to achieve with its strategy, analysts told Al Jazeera.
That’s because President Trump has sent contradictory messages. Trump told reporters he was aiming to “work on a deal” with Miguel Díaz-Canel’s communist government, or plan to make Cuba “free again,” hinting at a regime change long sought by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
“One possibility is that they will actually reach some kind of agreement,” William Leogrande, a professor at American University who specializes in U.S. foreign policy in Latin America, told Al Jazeera. “But the $64,000 question is, what are the terms of such a deal?”
“The second possibility, of course, is that this oil embargo causes a social collapse on the island, and there is no electricity, no gasoline, no fuel, and society literally begins to disintegrate,” he said.
A third possibility, Leogrande explained, is for the United States to adopt a Venezuelan approach and maintain the government while installing a more flexible leader.
“But even if there were people in the upper echelons of the Cuban government who could actually win the allegiance of the military, government and party officials, which I doubt, I don’t think the Trump administration would have any way to identify them or communicate with them,” he said.
“Try to bend the Cuban government.”
In the short term, Trump, who has long touted himself as a consensus builder in chief, appears to be leaning toward sending a message of seeking a deal with the tense government of President Díaz-Canel, said Tiziano Breda, senior analyst for Latin America and the Caribbean at the Armed Conflict Field and Event Data Project (ACLED).
President Trump said the two sides are in talks, but the nature of the contact and the terms of the proposal have not yet been made clear.
“President Trump has not shown much interest and enthusiasm in engaging with these left-wing governments in an ideological struggle. Given the circumstances, it gives the impression that President Trump’s goal is to bend the Cuban government rather than encourage its collapse,” Breda told Al Jazeera.
Díaz-Canal, for his part, said he was open to dialogue with the United States, but would only enter into dialogue on sovereignty “without pressure or preconditions.”
At the same time, he condemned Washington’s “criminal policies against the state that affect food, transportation, hospitals, schools, economic production, and the functioning of our vital systems.”
Cuba, Díaz-Canel, said in a statement last week that he was seeking peace but added that he was developing defense plans “in case we have to move to a state of war.”
unclear terminology
Analysts assessed that some new agreement between the United States and Cuba remains on the table, but that conditions seen as an existential threat to the Havana government would be a non-starter.
It remains unclear what kind of extraction President Trump would consider satisfactory.
Cuba has much less to offer economically than Venezuela, the South American country with the world’s largest proven oil reserves. But it also has large deposits of rare earth and critical minerals, including the world’s third-largest reserves of cobalt, a key mineral used in lithium-ion batteries and other advanced technologies.
“Economically, Cuba has little to offer other than an agreement on tourism and some trade deals,” Breda said, but added that Trump “could pressure Havana to yield on certain conditions, including immigration, the presence of U.S. competitors in the country, and security cooperation with Russia and China.”
Last month, in an executive order declaring Cuba an “unusual and unusual threat” to the United States, President Trump focused on relations with Russia and China, which cooperate with Cuba on defense but have no known military bases on the island.
The order also highlighted the Cuban government’s crackdown on dissent, further accusing Havana of being home to what the U.S. government considers “transnational terrorist groups,” including Hamas and Hezbollah.
Cuba experts have routinely dismissed the threat posed by Cuba as exaggerated, although they point to a lack of evidence to support claims of a “terrorist group.”
This raises further questions about what concrete concessions the administration could offer Trump if his order is seen as a precursor to negotiations.
A change of government?
Indeed, President Trump’s stated desire to pursue dialogue with Cuba’s current government is at odds with the decades-old ideology of the entire U.S. Republican Party, which has long avoided any form of engagement with the communist government established by Cuban leader Fidel Castro in 1959.
This approach is particularly supported by Mr. Rubio, the Trump administration’s top diplomat. Mr. Rubio himself is the son of Cuban immigrants, and his political career has been predicated on a hawkish approach to Cuba.
Mr. Rubio spent months promoting the idea that the Havana government was on the verge of collapse, laying the foundation for Mr. Trump’s current pressure campaign. His stance aligns with the influential Cuban-American voting bloc that makes up a key part of the Republican Party’s electoral coalition.
“Mr. Rubio’s goal is to get rid of this regime in Cuba, so he won’t be happy with any kind of agreement like the one President Trump has in Venezuela, especially if it’s more or less a permanent agreement,” Leogrande said.
Meanwhile, Leogrande downplayed the possibility that Trump would deploy military boots on the ground in Cuba, noting that Trump has so far avoided long-term military involvement.
He also assessed that a surgical operation like the one aimed at President Maduro was unlikely, adding that top military roles were still filled by direct appointees of former President Raul Castro, who served as the Communist Party’s top official until he stepped down in 2021.
According to ACLED’s Breda, any approach to overthrow the government is likely to result in a continuation of the current pressure campaign that is fueling opposition from a population suffering from shortages.
“However, it remains to be seen whether Mr. Rubio will be able to convince President Trump that there will be no significant impact in terms of migration, instability and violence on the island and that there will be no spillover effects,” Breda said.
What comes next?
Rui Perez, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who has focused on Cuban history for many years, said determining Trump’s motives may be akin to reading the tea leaves, noting that “deep historical precedent” for Trump’s current actions may help shed light on what happens next.
Perez pointed to U.S. policy that predated the 1959 Cuban Revolution, dating back to the military regime the U.S. established in Cuba in the early 20th century, and the Monroe Doctrine of 1823, which first sought to assert U.S. influence across Latin America.
“If you zoom in and out, you can see the incredible continuity of policy over time and how it manifests itself over and over again,” he told Al Jazeera. “But the thread that ties all these iterations into one package is the determination to deny Cuban sovereignty and national self-determination.”
The Trump administration recently made clear its goal of restoring American “prominence” in the Western Hemisphere, a move Trump and his allies have dubbed the “Donroe Doctrine.”
“America’s political leaders want Cubans to say ‘uncle,’ surrender, and acquiesce,” Perez said. “While this sounds simplistic, it is driving policy deep within the American national psyche, especially in an administration that is now redefining the ‘Donroe Doctrine.'”
On the other hand, a prolonged impasse could have unforeseen consequences for Washington, such as bringing Cuba closer to Russia and China.
Russia, which is already under heavy U.S. sanctions, has not increased oil shipments to Cuba in recent weeks, but may choose to do so as the U.S. pressure campaign continues, American University’s Leo Grande explained. China and other regional allies could provide alternative forms of aid that would free up funds for energy purchases.
“The more pressure the United States puts on Cuba, the more the United States threatens Cuba, the more Cuba has an incentive to seek patronage among America’s adversaries,” he said.
In response, ACLED’s Breda pointed to the costs of a prolonged diplomatic impasse, which could lead to further difficulties under a government long accused of cracking down on domestic dissent.
“The main risk is creating a humanitarian crisis on the island, which could affect migration abroad and also cause a wave of insecurity,” he said.
“Of course, this will test the government’s ability to maintain power, but it will also increase the likelihood of another round of crackdowns and mass arrests.”
