Caribbean Review: Previewing US-Cuba Relations Amidst Trump’s Return to Power
loops7/cako74
On January 14, 2025, Former President Joe Biden announced an Executive Order removing Cuba from the United States’ list of state sponsors of terrorism, marking a sudden thaw in U.S.-Cuba relations. However, this progress was reversed with the return of President Donald Trump to power. Just a week later, Trump reinstated Cuba to the state sponsor of terrorism list effectively isolating the island nation once again. A move declared by Cuban foreign minister, Bruno Rodriguez, as a form of “political coercion” as opposed to a genuine effort of combatting terrorism.
It is no surprise that the Trump administration upon their earth-shaking reentrance into office would reimpose their traditional hardline stance against Cuba, completely reversing Biden’s largely altruistic effort to thaw relations with the island nation. However, many of the Trump administration’s broader goals have taken on a familiar tone, albeit pursued with a more aggressive approach, particularly on tariffs and immigration. Yet it remains to be seen, in its infancy, what will change with the Trump administration’s approach to Cuba.
The Prospects of the Embargo
Conversations regarding US-Cuba relations usually mention the famous history of Cold War tensions and retaliation, but today’s discussion on Cuba begins and ends with the U.S. trade embargo. Important figures such as newly confirmed Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, have shared a consistent and well-known hardline stance on Cuba when then-Senator Rubio stated, “If we want what is best for the Cuban people and in the best interest of the United States, we should keep the embargo in place—until Cuba is finally free.” Other U.S. leaders, such as Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, have expressed pragmatic frustration with current policy, citing the fifty years during which the embargo has failed to bring about meaningful political reform on the island.
Supporters of Secretary Rubio’s realpolitik stance suggest the continuation of an embargo, as they fear free trade in an economy that is 90% controlled by the state. They believe in order to avoid the economic growth that could provide the current regime any increased capacity for repression, political reform is needed in order to welcome free trade back into Cuba. However opponents of the current embargo in place suggest that it offers the Cuban government an opportunity to use the United States as a scapegoat for the economy’s hardship and thus reinforce an anti-American ideology that persists.
The consistent hardline stance on Cuba from the United States is often considered a relic of Cold War politics yet, moments such as the July 2021 protests, are used by its supporters to reinforce the embargo and build pressure for further restrictions on remittances and travel. Incandescently, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, two leading organizations on the defense of human rights, reported a severe crackdown and repression of protesters by the Cuban government in 2021 where 1400 people were detained. In the context of the scarcity of food and medicine during the lasting impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, protesters took to the streets to voice their frustration with the government, an instance demonstrating the lack of respect for free assembly and free speech, governing tenets of the U.S.’ foreign policy doctrines, and providing standing to critics of the Cuban regime.
Perspectives from the International community
The current standstill in policy for Cuba means that the island loses out on about 144 billion dollars worth of GDP per year based on an estimate from American University Professor Dr. Ricardo Torres Perez. For reference, the current GDP of Cuba’s economy last measured in 2020 was about 107 billion, a staggering result that has stunted the growth of the economy and exacted immense economic hardship on the Cuban people. For Cubans, this means a lack of internet access, severely aging technology, and the inaccessibility of medical supplies for which has amounted to debilitating infrastructure. Otherwise mentioned in the UN Secretary-General’s 2023 Report on the U.S. Trade Embargo on Cuba mentions, “[the embargo] continues to provoke material shortages and scarcity, to sow the seeds of discouragement and dissatisfaction, to harm the Cuban people and to impede economic growth.”
The United Nations General Assembly votes every year in an annual session against the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba that is only opposed by two nations in the world; the United States and Israel. The General Assembly sides with the premise that the embargo is an outdated form of economic warfare, a sentiment outlined in the Secretary-General’s most recent report on it stating, “the Government of the United States persists in ignoring the Assembly’s many pronouncements calling for it to unconditionally eliminate its failed, unilateral and criminal policy against Cuba.”
Responding to the last vote at the General Assembly in October, the U.S. Permanent Mission to the United Nations website published an explanation of their vote, affirming, “sanctions are one element of our broader effort to advance democracy and promote respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in Cuba,” in reference to the U.S. opposition. A policy conformed to by the Biden administration, no different than that pursued by Biden’s predecessor and now successor.
An Opportunity for change
While it is safe to say that the widespread prediction within the policy community and experts on Cuba reaffirm that the embargo on Cuba is here to stay, President Trump’s policy proposals such as purchasing Greenland or ending the Ukraine War on “Day One” seem to encompass an opportunistic and chaotic view of foreign policy. President Trump might unpredictably be persuaded to rethink Cuba as a space to partake in business rather than its current status as an island pariah. While economies like that of Canada, Brazil and China capitalize on Cuba’s market for their own benefit, the U.S. continuously sidelines itself from unlocking an economy for trade that resides just 90 miles from its shore.
Trump’s own Cuban-American Secretary of State promises to unleash an unrelenting batch of sanctions unless Cuba’s government commits to the release of political prisoners, an improvement in human rights and an embrace of democracy yet, no rapprochement will be considered that includes a carrot instead of a stick approach, perse. The stick has been used for six decades to no avail. The future of Cuba’s embargo might see change when President Trump’s interest in economic opportunity meets the common sense of a deal.
