Like an echo that never dies, so is the history of United States hostility toward Cuba: the island always ends up being the useful enemy, the perfect punching bag for a U.S. foreign policy that, in the end, needs external adversaries to sustain itself. After Washington’s spectacular economic, diplomatic, and military failure in Iran—which only exposed to the international community the preexisting commitments between Netanyahu and Trump—Washington raises its head and, proud and disdainful, looks again at the Caribbean —if it ever stopped looking—.
Cuba, the eternal awkward island for the United States, has been, for more than sixty years, a symbol of resistance against arbitrariness and the imposition of American hegemony. However, Trump has never hesitated to refer to it as the “failed nation.” That is, a label that works very well for him to keep justifying and sustaining blockades, sanctions, and pressures that keep that American country constantly on the edge of collapse.
“After Washington’s spectacular economic, diplomatic, and military failure in Iran, Washington lifts its head and, proud and haughty, looks again at the Caribbean”
But why talk about Cuba right now, when officially the war in Iran is already over? Because, precisely, that conflict was a grotesque spectacle with bleeding figures: between thirty and fifty billion dollars evaporated in barely a hundred days; a barrel of oil that climbed to ninety-four dollars; and a global inflation that spiked to four percent. More data? For one, the Pentagon spoke of economic and military losses in drones and bases, but on the other hand, Moody’s —one of the world’s three major credit rating agencies— made a harsher calculation: 132 million dollars in indirect costs already absorbed by the households of workers and American taxpayers. Lives? Eight thousand Iranian fighters killed, and tens of thousands wounded in that same country; by contrast, only fifteen American fighters died. And all for what? It’s the question that inevitably lands on the table: so that only 16% of voters consider the war a success; but for the rest of the population it is clear: that war whim is the origin of the exorbitant and unjustified rise in the cost of living.
What remains, then? Another large-scale military venture, against another improvised enemy, would be an absurdity. And Trump cannot afford another blow of that magnitude to the national coffers; much less, at risk of returning from Iran empty-handed, internationally discredited and with a speech held together by pins. The only thing left is to look toward what is easiest, the weakest, the cheapest, the closest. Venezuela has already been looted for its oil in the name of a democracy that never fully arrives. Greenland was merely a place to go for the circus. Mexico? That is a labyrinthine trap that could prove even more costly than Iran. Only Cuba remains: a island battered by blockades, blackouts, shortages of food and medicines, with an unsustainable domestic inflation and a productive system that barely breathes. So, that small island, situated three hundred fifty kilometers from Florida and dubbed by Trump as the “failed nation,” could become the perfect enemy. An enemy that the U.S. president has not stopped seeking since returning to the White House: keeping the siege costs very little, the political payoff of verbally attacking it is high, and the ever less credible American narrative that exporting democracy is an inscrutable duty suits him to a tee in times when he keeps making enemies.
“That small island, which is three hundred fifty kilometers from Florida and which Trump calls ‘the failed nation,’ could become the perfect enemy”
The only certain thing now is that Trump has been bringing up Cuba with the media for a couple of weeks. And he has done so in that haughty, brash tone that defines him. A few days ago he asserted: “It’s Cuba’s turn.” He said this in a lengthy interview with the American outlet Axios. He argued that Marco Rubio, the Secretary of State, is already planning actions along those lines. Earlier this month, he claimed that once the Iran conflict ended, he would go after the island. And that moment has now arrived. Moreover, in a briefing, also earlier this month, he insisted that it was necessary “to topple the Cuban regime”, accusing it of not being able to feed its people. As if that weren’t enough, this month, addressing the Cuban-American community, he concluded: “Cuban Americans vote for me.” He said he has “very good news” for Cubans, spoke well of the economic and business elite based in Miami, and assured them the possibility that once the Cuban regime falls, they could return to their homeland, if they wish, to invest and help it grow.
What will become of Cuba after those statements? What is the international community’s view of this new stance after what has been seen in Venezuela, Iran, Mexico, and Greenland?
An enemy that does not mind being attacked
If there is one thing Cuba has learned since the second half of the last century, it is to endure. Yes, to withstand and survive under the harshest conditions. The question here is: how long can it keep doing so?
For now, two of the major Spanish hotel groups, Meliá Hotels International and Iberostar, have already left the island. The reason? The prolonged and intense energy crisis, plus the pressure imposed by U.S. sanctions. To that effect, Minor Hotels (NH) and Royalton Hotels (formerly Blue Diamond) have also joined, closing operations in Havana and other destinations.
Now, the reality is undeniable: the American fondness for arms, gunpowder, missiles, and sending its troops overseas to install “democracy” and seize oil — or other resources— is real, but why would they fire a shot to control Cuba? Why would they further raise the cost of their modus vivendi in favor of a new war?
“Washington knows well: no need to spend billions of dollars or risk the lives of its soldiers to seize control of Cuba”
The perversity of this case does not lie in whether Cuba collapses on its own; what it oozes with Machiavellianism are the pressures that have choked it for decades. The island subsists with economic programs that barely keep the balance, while daily life is nothing more than an ode to survival after blackouts and ongoing shortages. And Washington knows it well: there is no need to spend billions or risk the lives of its soldiers to seize control of Cuba, as it did with Venezuela. Trump only needs to maintain the narrative of the “failed nation” and use it, as the saying goes, as a punching bag.
Because the United States needs enemies as much as it needs oxygen. If they aren’t Latin American drug traffickers, they are the most extreme Islamists, or European socialists, or Nazis, or Chinese capitalist megaproducers. It makes no difference; the aim is to have a foreign people —better still, if it is governed by some authoritarian ruler— in order to invade it, in order to provide them with a democratic system and “manage” their natural resources as the institutional reconstruction unfolds. That is why it is no surprise that their imperialist aims are now aimed at that small island that has always played a discordant role with the halo of “freedom” and “democracy” that the United States proclaims so loudly.
Unfortunately, for Cubans, their numbers are as dire as their realities. Inflation last year was 3.7%, but it is expected to be much higher this year due to the shortage of goods and the energy crisis. Blackouts are increasingly constant, and have lasted up to twenty hours in a row: life without air conditioning, without refrigerators, without appliances, without light itself, without technology, begins to feel more like an apocalyptic scenario than a republic with a chance at economic prosperity. The minimum wage sits above five euros, but, according to data from ONEI (the national office of statistics and information), ten times more is needed to meet the most basic needs.
“The objective is to have a foreign people to invade it, in order to provide it with a democratic system and ‘manage’ its natural resources”
Those data, and those realities, are well known in the Oval Office in Washington. That is why it is not surprising that on June 5, Trump imposed direct sanctions against Miguel Díaz-Canel, the Cuban president, his family, and other senior officials of that country. In response, the foreign minister Bruno Rodríguez declared that those actions were “vile” and worthy of an imperialist policy.
Ultimately, returning to the idea of the urgent need that the United States has to find strategic enemies, Cuba, here, fulfills the role precisely: it is close, it is heavily sanctioned, and above all, it is a political symbol. After the Iran disaster, Cuba returns to the center of expansionist radar as a reminder that Washington’s aggressiveness is not measured by victories, but by the ability to keep the enemy alive in the collective imagination —locally and internationally. Now, Cuba, without Fidel at the helm, without the USSR behind, faces a very challenging onslaught that, apparently, Trump —with the help of Marco Rubio— has in mind.
What will happen between the United States under Trump and the Cuba that is agonizing? For now, we only know that the current American president has two years left. And two years, as we are already seeing, is a long time.
