The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has been sidestepping the issue of whether to launch military strikes against Cuba for some time. It appears increasingly inclined to take such a step. It is a significant escalation from a few months ago, when officials were focused primarily on using economic and diplomatic pressure to pressure the communist regime in Havana.
A U.S. official and a person familiar with the administration’s discussions on Cuba said that President Donald Trump and his advisers are increasingly frustrated that the U.S. pressure campaign, which has included depriving the island of fuel, has not resulted in agreement from Cuban leaders on significant economic and political reforms. That’s why they’re considering military action much more seriously than before, writes Nahal Toussi, senior foreign policy correspondent for POLITICO.
The mood in Cuba has definitely changed, Toussi said.
The initial idea about Cuba was that the leadership was weak and that a combination of stricter sanctions, a de facto oil embargo, and clear U.S. military victories in Venezuela and Iran would scare the Cubans into making a deal. But now the situation with Iran has turned sour, and the Cubans are proving to be much tougher than initially thought. So military action is now on the table.
Last week, reports emerged that the United States was preparing to indict former Cuban President Raul Castro — the 94-year-old brother of the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. That has led to speculation that the United States could launch a military operation to remove him, similar to the operation against Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro in January.
But U.S. military planners are considering a wide range of options that go beyond capturing one or two people. Military action could range from a single air strike aimed at intimidating the regime into concessions to a ground invasion aimed at overthrowing it. In recent weeks, U.S. Southern Command has been “convening a series of planning meetings.” In other words, plans for potential military action have begun to be drawn up, the U.S. official and the person familiar with the discussions told me.
The Pentagon has ample military power in the region. Cuba — a country of 10 million people — is just 90 miles off the coast of Florida. One unlikely scenario is using Cuban exiles in a possible operation. "They have concluded that the exiles have no role here except as cheering supporters and annoyances. This is not going to be Bay of Pigs 2.0," the source said.
A White House official echoed Trump's claims that Cuba will soon "fall" and "we will be there to help them."
The official added that the Pentagon's job is to prepare to give the commander-in-chief the maximum number of options. That doesn't mean the president has made a decision. Trump administration officials are already preparing the ground in the public arena for possible military action.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio hinted at something worrisome in an interview with Fox News last week. "We'll give them a chance, but I don't think that's going to happen. "I don't think we're going to be able to change the direction of Cuba while these people are in power," said Rubio, who is also a national security adviser.
Over the weekend, Axios reported that Cuba had acquired hundreds of military drones and was discussing ways to use them in the event of a conflict between Washington and Havana. Many national security analysts viewed the publication as a controlled leak of information intended to build a case for a US military strike against Cuba.
The Cuban embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. It's always unwise to predict what the unpredictable Trump will do, so you probably shouldn't be too quick to place bets just yet.
Trump also needs to take into account the political situation, amid his declining approval ratings and the sharp rise in fuel prices due to the war with Iran. The scale of a potential operation against Cuba could depend on what he thinks his MAGA supporters would accept.
"They could try to do a fairly limited operation, but if that's what they're thinking, they're probably overestimating what they can accomplish," Brian Latell, a former senior CIA official who worked on Cuban affairs, added in a Politico analysis.
But there's no doubt that the administration's stance on Cuba has become increasingly hard-line, especially in recent weeks.
Latel said Cuban authorities do not seem to fully realize how economically dysfunctional their country has become. They are responding to American pressure with ideas like allowing foreign investment in hotels, while their real problems are structural, including a crumbling electricity grid. It is also not always clear who is really in charge in Havana or how much power the Castro family still has, he added.
"The system is so rigid and based on consensus. They live in a different reality and literally don't care about the Cuban people at all," Latell said.
Cuban authorities have asked for more help from Russia. Moscow has already sent a tanker of fuel, which the United States allowed to reach the island in late March, providing temporary relief.
Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel wrote on the social network X that a U.S. military attack on Cuba "would cause a bloodbath with incalculable consequences". He was apparently reacting to a series of recent actions that have increasingly demonstrated the impatience of the Trump administration.
In addition to the drone report and the possible indictment of Raul Castro, these actions include:
The expansion of US sanctions against Cuba;
The disclosure of CIA Director John Ratcliffe’s visit to the island last week, during which he made several requests to Havana;
Reports that the US is increasing reconnaissance flights over the island;
As well as disputes between the US and Cuba over the terms of a US offer of $100 million in aid.
Defense officials did not respond to a request for comment, but a State Department spokesman reiterated the administration’s accusations that Cuba is a haven for terrorists and opponents of the US. Rubio’s public rhetoric has changed along with the administration’s internal calculations.
Rubio was born in the United States to Cuban immigrants and has long detested the repressive and corrupt regime in Havana. But in the early days after the Venezuelan operation that cut off Venezuelan oil supplies to Cuba, Rubio placed more emphasis on economic change in Cuba than on political change. That message suggested that Rubio wanted to move gradually and methodically toward Cuba — to limit the chaos of a sudden political collapse. (Or maybe that’s what Trump wanted, and Rubio simply went along with it; administration spokesmen wouldn’t tell me which was true.)
The idea was to persuade the current Cuban leadership to undertake serious economic reforms. They include privatizing many state assets, providing greater internet access to Cuban citizens, and allowing more foreign investment.
But the regime has seen such moves as a threat to its own survival, according to people familiar with the talks. Rubio says many of Cuba’s economic problems stem from the long-standing U.S. embargo on the Caribbean nation and other U.S. pressures. There is also ample historical evidence that economic change can undermine the power of authoritarian regimes.
Over the months, Rubio’s messaging has shifted. He has begun to emphasize political change alongside economic change. He has recently spoken of the need to remove “the people who rule,” without going into detail.
This is not a political move to appease Cuban-American activists in Florida. Rather, Rubio is increasingly convinced that the regime in Havana is beyond repair. Perhaps most interestingly, in recent weeks, he has intensified his argument that Cuba poses a threat to U.S. national security — a charge backed up by photos from the Southern Command. This message has been echoed by other administration officials, who argue that Havana’s ties to Moscow and Beijing make it a particular danger.
Politico also notes that Cuba is on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terrorism.
According to a CIA official briefed on Ratcliffe’s visit, the intelligence chief “made it clear that Cuba can no longer serve as a platform for adversaries to advance hostile agendas in our hemisphere.”
The publication warns Cuba watchers not to think that Trump’s difficulties in Iran will deter him from military action against Cuba. The chaos in Iran could make the U.S. president even more eager to score another victory. Trump may view Cuba as an easy win. But that could be a miscalculation.
Of course, it won’t be easy. It never is, but that rarely stops Trump.