HAVANA (Realist English). Cuba is going through one of the most difficult periods in its history. US President Donald Trump has effectively issued an ultimatum to its leadership and people: either the country submits to external management by Washington, or it faces economic strangulation with the possible option of a power takeover along the Venezuelan model.
However, there is a fundamental difference between these scenarios. In the case of Venezuela, the White House was primarily dissatisfied with the figure of President Maduro.
And, of course, the fact that because of the policies of the current Venezuelan president and his predecessor Chávez, the US could not build profitable economic relations or make use of the geopolitical opportunities of that Bolivarian Republic.
The situation is analysed for Realist English by Tatiana Poloskova, Doctor of Political Sciences and First‑Class State Counsellor of the Russian Federation.
Behind the scenes of official Havana: elites and perestroika
In the case of Cuba, official Washington does not particularly insist on the resignation of the current leadership of the Island of Freedom. Trump would be quite satisfied if Miguel Díaz‑Canel went for real, rather than declarative, liberalisation of the economy, allowed US business into Cuba’s economy, and reduced economic and especially military‑political contacts with China and Russia to purely nominal ones. Like, the presence of these countries poses a threat to US geopolitical interests in the region.
The White House is also discussing a scenario of a Gorbachev‑style perestroika in Cuba, which would open the doors to American business. Why is this being discussed? In the “competent” structures of the US, they are well aware that the ideological monolithism of Cuba’s political elite has long been more of a showcase than a reality. Let us recall the events of 2021, when Cuba was shaken by the largest protests in the period of socialism.
The 2021 protests: a crack in the monolith
A series of Cuban anti‑government protests began on 11 July 2021 in the capital Havana and other major cities. The trigger was the rationing of food and medicine and their shortage in the country, which was felt especially acutely during the most severe phase of the COVID‑19 pandemic. The protests broke out after reports of new records in daily morbidity and mortality.
At the time, within a few days, the authorities managed to fully bring the situation under control. Nevertheless, observers characterised the protests as the largest anti‑government demonstrations in Cuba since the Maleconazo in 1994. It was quite obvious that without initiators and coordinators of these actions within the governing bodies (and simultaneously in different provinces of Cuba), these protests could not have taken place.
In Cuba, all public life, despite constant economic crises and the ration card system, and everyday discontent in the form of the same long‑permitted jokes about Fidel, is strictly controlled, including by the security services. Let us recall a popular Cuban joke: “The other day, the state security organs detained participants of an anti‑government meeting. Of the 20 detained, 19 turned out to be employees of the Cuban state security organs.”
Transformation of the Cuban elite: from romance to pragmatism
It is obvious that among those involved in the leadership of Cuba, including its security bloc, there are many who know the real situation in the country and soberly assess its prospects. And far from all of them are obsessed with the idea of eternal confrontation with the US and defending the ideals of socialism. I can give a personal example: 15 years ago, one of the representatives of Cuba’s top management discussed with me how an analogue of Gorbachev’s perestroika could be implemented on the Island of Freedom. So we should not compare the romance of revolutionary Cuba with the current moods of its elites.
Especially since, if it were not for the option of saving the revolution proposed to Fidel by Soviet ambassador Alexeev – the goal of which was the expulsion of foreign elites, and not socialism at all – the US would have suppressed the Cuban protest back then. Let us recall that Alexeev then offered Fidel assistance from the USSR in exchange for the revolution being declared socialist. And the USSR kept its promise then. But, alas, modern Russia is not the USSR, either in ideology or in might.
Batista and the modern generation: a gap in perception
Some experts recall that under dictator Batista, Cuba was, in fact, a legalised brothel of the US and a holiday destination for the American mafia. All true. But, alas, the modern generation no longer remembers and has never seen the horrifying poverty and wild racism.
They talk about how, as their elders told them, under Batista there were luxurious restaurants in Havana (unlike the present time), generous tips from Americans, and an abundance of food. True, far from everyone could enjoy these benefits. But in fairness, it should be said that the revolution was made by eastern Cuba – now the poorest region of the country.
Why is that? Let me repeat that I have had the opportunity to be on short‑term business trips to Cuba more than two dozen times; I have travelled all over the country and met with different people. The generation under 50 does not feel hostility towards the US and, in the current pragmatic times, is more concerned with solving their own problems than with the ideals of the struggle for a bright future for humanity. And I think that Cubans really deserve a better life than an eternal ration card system, a shortage of transport, and now also systemic blackouts, which in tropical conditions is a catastrophe.
Cuban survival pragmatism: the view of Jesús López Gómez
However, let us listen to the Cubans themselves. Specifically for Realist English, the well‑known Cuban journalist and public figure Jesús López Gómez shared his opinion on the situation:
“Without oil, Cubans survive. Although, of course, they suffer, but they also do what they do best: they adapt. Cubans are replacing their gas‑guzzling 1950s American cars with electric motorcycles and auto‑rickshaws from China; they are importing lithium batteries to run televisions and fans during power outages; they are using generators running on more affordable natural gas; and they are installing solar panels on roofs and even on motorcycles and cars.
For nearly seven decades of US pressure, the Cuban people, despite all the difficulties, have improvised to survive. Without external fuel, Cuba powers its grid solely with domestic oil and gas, as well as a growing network of solar power plants sponsored by China. This is enough to cover about half of Cuba’s electricity needs.
In the first months of 2026, purchases of petroleum products such as gasoline, diesel, fuel oil and lubricants from the US rose sharply, increasing from lower levels at the beginning of the year to more than $12 million in April alone. Cuba’s private sector imported fuel from the US worth nearly $24 million in May. A significant portion of diesel supplies arrive in ISO containers from ports in Florida and Louisiana.”
Indeed, Cubans are used to surviving in any situation. But there is a limit to any social mimicry. And why suffer so much? No one is calling for falling into Trump’s arms, especially since businessmen like him do nothing for nothing. But that is what bargaining is for.
The role of China: investments under threat
Now about China. Many in our country, “watching the fight from the sidelines,” pin their hopes on Beijing’s help for the Island of Freedom, both economic and military. Let us start with the fact that Beijing will not fight Trump on the battlefield. Despite disagreements, these two countries are bound by mutual interests. And after China effectively lost multi‑billion dollar investments placed in Panama, Venezuela, Colombia, and now there is a real threat of losing them in Brazil, Beijing will not spend money on pulling Cuba out of its dire situation. And where is the guarantee that the Venezuelan scenario will not be repeated?
Russia: the betrayal of the 90s that has not been forgotten
As for Russia, one can moan and groan, as some Russian experts do: “Why did we leave the Island of Freedom in the 90s? Why did we close the military base?” But we didn’t just leave under Kozyrev. We left rather shabbily. Abandoning Cuba, which was under sanctions and economic blockade, to the mercy of fate. The consequence was the most severe famine in the country, the horrors of the so‑called Special Period. It was then that Fidel called the high‑rise building of the Russian embassy “a dagger in the back of the revolution.” Cubans do not remind us of this, but they have not forgotten. The countries of the “rotten West” then saved the dying Cuba, which, together with partners of the Island of Freedom, developed effective tourism networks, including hotels. And Cuba has always lived off tourism.
Trump between embraces and bombs: the military scenario is on the table
The White House, it seems, has not yet decided whether it will strangle Cuba in its embrace or carry out a small victorious military operation. For now, on 13 July 2026, the US State Department announced the expansion of sanctions against Cuba. Restrictive measures were introduced against the country’s Ministry of Tourism, several paramilitary structures – special forces and territorial defence forces – as well as against several export‑import companies.
Sanctions hit, in particular, the company Enetec S. A., which imports fuels and lubricants; the foreign trade association Grupo Empresarial de Comercio Exterior (GECOMEX); and the insurance company Organizacion Superior de Direccion Empresarial Caudal S. A.
The restrictive measures are introduced on the basis of US President Donald Trump’s Executive Order No. 14404 of 1 May 2026. But already since 2025, the United States has been consistently and systematically increasing pressure on the Island of Freedom: this is, first of all, an oil blockade. The US has impeded oil supplies to Cuba, including from Venezuela, and threatened tariffs on countries that continue such supplies. This has become one of the reasons for the acute fuel crisis on the island.
At the same time, experts note that the US is rather seeking to make Havana more loyal and to create conditions for rapprochement (for example, to allow American capital), rather than to achieve a change of the political system on the island. And this is reality. For Trump, as an international‑level trader, it is, in principle, all the same with whom to build economic relations: with communists, liberals – as long as they let him into the country’s resources and are obedient.
As for the tough scenario, on 13 August, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that the administration of President Donald Trump continues to consider various options for Cuba, including military scenarios, as reported by Russian official media.
“All options are on the table, including military options,” Hegseth told journalists in Panama. Earlier, on 11 August, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Cuba would choose a different path of development before the end of President Donald Trump’s administration. For now, the US administration wants to find a new leader for Cuba along the lines of Delcy Rodríguez.
The Shield of the Americas: NATO of Latin America against Cuba
And, naturally, Trump is revving up his favourite topic of drug cartels. He notes that a US military operation against Cuba is a matter of time, as the United States needs to change the regime in the republic that protects drug cartels. Is there a drug trafficking problem in Cuba? Those who are familiar with the situation on the Island of Freedom will answer: of course there is. Try driving towards the port in Santiago de Cuba at night – people will knock on your car windows and offer you cocaine or something simpler. Naturally, if there is drug trafficking in the country, then there are those who protect it.
But Trump uses the topic of fighting drugs to solve more important tasks for himself. Thus, the US is expanding the military‑political alliance “Shield of the Americas,” which has already been dubbed the NATO of Latin America, including to increase pressure on Cuba. Let us recall that the 19th member of the bloc was Colombia, whose new president, Abelardo de la Espriella, has already set a course for a complete break with Havana.
According to Russian official media, the “Shield of the Americas,” whose main declared goal is the fight against drug cartels, includes Argentina, Bolivia, Guatemala, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, El Salvador, Chile, Ecuador and other states. At the same time, the largest regional powers – Mexico and Brazil – flatly refuse to join the alliance. For now, they refuse. What will happen after October 2026, if the left‑wing president of Brazil fails to hold on to power, is, in principle, already clear.
We would like Cuba, its authorities and its people to make the right choice. It is only a pity that, it seems, there will be no one to support free choice this time. So will the Island of Freedom remain free?
Tatiana Poloskova is a Doctor of Political Sciences and a First‑Class State Counsellor of the Russian Federation, writing exclusively for Realist English
