U.S. Squeezes Cuba Even as It Searches for a New
Regime Leader
By Tyler Pager, Julian E. Barnes and Frances Robles
Aug.
7, 2026 New York Times
My
personal reaction shared with the authors
I
have been involved with trying to achieve normal mutually respectful relations
between the US and Cuba for more than 25 years, based largely on Quaker
inspired similar post war reconciliation work with Viet Nam, Laos and Cambodia.
I
am intrigued by the article about “regime alteration” because it parallels a
theme a zoom group of engaged (but not solidarity) Cuba experts have been
wrestling with for at least three months. Most of the group is skeptical,
but a few of us believe President Trump is more interested in achieving a
legacy worthy peace deal than a military conquest. On the US side that
has to include the historic event of ending the embargo, which Obama couldn’t
and Trump may be uniquely able to. Our question was whether the Cubans
could compromise enough to make a deal, while maintaining self-respect /
sovereignty.
That
question was answered when the Cubans announced on their own schedule
Vietnamese style market reform and radically different international economic
relationships. They have explicitly used the intense US economic
pressure to overcome resistance within the Party and bureaucracy to advice from
their own economists and primary foreign allies. All of my Cuban friends
and other sources who are normally critics of the government think this is
finally real, a sea change—and irreversible even if some want to try. The
problem is that Cuba’s sincerity can’t be tested without a big change in US
policy as it affects US and other foreign traders, international financial
institutions and investors.
What
is the Administration referring to?
Cuba has announced major economic changes, allowing
in more private enterprise, but the measures appear to have fallen short of what
the Trump administration has demanded.
I
may be too cynical but I fear that they are pushing for special if not monopoly
access for US investors and companies. The recent rounds of sanctions forcing
out the European hotel chains that built modern mass tourism in Cuba smells a
bit like creating conditions for substitution of US chains. We are aware
of the Trump friend/donor who is buying 55% of Sherritt after it was forced out
of its investments in Cuba with nickel, cobalt and oil production.
Scan
the 559 on line comments to this article.
They are overwhelmingly critical of US punishment policies and many are
convinced Trump is motivated by greed for hotels, casinos and beach front
property. If the Vietnamese can bend their laws to enable a Trump golf
resort outside of Ha Noi, it is not impossible for the Cubans to make a similar
accommodation.
My
guess is that the level of distrust between our countries and
self-righteousness among leaders on both sides is the underlying
obstacle. My own trust building formula is to return to the first year of
the first term of Trump before Mauricio Claver-Carone and the now despised John
Bolton created “maximum pressure”. That should include freedom for
the 2021 protestors. (See my responses here to increasingly strong
posts by Ulises Aquino, a widely respected cultural leader and creator of Opera
de la Calle https://cubapeopletopeople.blogspot.com/2026/07/ulises-aquino-post-economic-reform.html)
Assuming
there is principle involved, that could mean the US is insisting on commitment
to the opening of a political process as in Venezuela. My solution there
is to test Mariela Castro’s prediction to CNN in 2012 that ending the embargo could mean a single party system will no longer
be necessary. https://cubapeopletopeople.blogspot.com/2026/04/mariela-castro-on-political.html
Absent the embargo, Cuba would not be the same country
economically or politically. I have always wondered why dissidents in
Cuba and among exiles haven’t been leaders of demands to end the embargo which
served so well Fidel’s messianic nationalism. Revenge, fantasies of
regaining property and power?
Few in our discussions think post Iran, the Administration
will risk military action against Cuba. Most believe Trump and his
advisers will count on continued public suffering to produce change.
Finally, the missing element in this article and most other
coverage of this current state of conflict with Cuba is any recognition of the
legal and moral damage to the US. In effect we are in the same position
as Putin with Ukraine, our historical assumptions of dominance and threat are
superior to our neighbor’s right to follow its own path. A unilateral
unprovoked economic blockade of oil and apparently other shipments of essential
goods is an act of war and untold human suffering is the result. From my
Peace Corps service in Peru and other international experience, I have no doubt
the extent to which our reputation is being destroyed in Latin America, Africa,
Asia and Europe. The closest neo-colonial parallel I see is our support
for Pinochet in Chile.
John McAuliff
Fund for Reconciliation and Development
Riverhead, New York