U.S. imposes new Cuba sanctions as Caribbean tensions rise

[El Presidente]

 

U.S. imposes new Cuba sanctions as Caribbean tensions rise

May 19 (UPI) -- U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he has imposed additional sanctions against Cuba, with more to come in the days and weeks ahead, as the Trump administration ratchets up the pressure on the communist government of President Miguel Diaz-Canel.

The sanctions announced Monday by the U.S. State Department target 11 Cuba officials and three Cuban security and intelligence entities, freezing any assets under U.S. jurisdiction and prohibiting U.S. persons from doing business with them.

Agencies blacklisted were Cuba's Ministry of Interior, the National Revolutionary Police Force and its Directorate of Intelligence, Havana's primary foreign intelligence agency.

Officials hit included the heads of the Revolutionary Police Force as well as various ministers, the chief of staff of military counterintelligence, the chief of the Central Army of Cuba, the chief of the Eastern Army of Cuba, and the president of Cuba's National Assembly for People's Power, among others.

Rubio described them as "Cuban regime elites" and officials who have been involved in repressing the Cuban people.

"Regime-aligned actors such as those designated today bear responsibility for the suffering of the Cuban people, the failing Cuban economy and the exploitation of Cuba for foreign intelligence, military and terror operations," he said in a statement, while warning that more sanctions "can be expected" in the following days and weeks.

"Today's designations further restrict the Cuban regime's ability to suppress the will of the Cuban people."

Late Monday, Diaz-Canel lashed out at the United States over the sanctions, saying no one in Cuba's government, political party or military institutions has any assets or property to protect under U.S. jurisdiction -- and the Trump administration knows this.

"The anti-Cuban rhetoric of hate tries to make people believe such things exist in order to justify the escalation of its total economic war," he said in a social media statement.

"That's why we will continue to denounce, int he firmest and most energetic way possible, the genocidal siege that seeks to strangle our people."

He described Trump's Cuban policy as "collective punishment" and "an act of genocide," calling on the international community to prosecute those responsible for it.

President Donald Trump has been targeting Havana with sanctions and economic restrictions since early this year, when he declared a national emergency concerning Cuba on the grounds that it has aligned with "numerous hostile countries, transnational terrorist groups and malign actors adverse to the United States."

Trump has blocked Venezuelan oil shipments to Cuba, adding to the decades-old economic embargo and worsening the island nation's energy crisis. The country's fuel oil stocks have run dry, according to officials, and blackouts are common.

Trump has repeatedly raised the prospect of military action against Cuba and has stopped short of directly calling for regime change as he seeks to extend the United States' influence across the Western Hemisphere.

Cuba blames the United States for its current economic and energy situation, and the sanctions came as its foreign minister, Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla, on Monday, defended Havana's right to self-defense in response to reports that claimed the island nation had purchased drones from Russia and Iran.

While some Republicans, including Sen. Rick Scott and Rep. Carlos Gimenez, both of Florida, celebrated the sanctions, several Democrats have condemned the Trump administration's broader campaign, accusing it of manufacturing a pretext for war.

Reps. Delia Ramirez of Illinois and Nydia Velazquez of New York lambasted the administration in a joint statement, accusing it of attempting to justify another "unauthorized and unlawful military invasion," seemingly referring to the U.S. military abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January and Trump's late February strikes on Iran, which triggered a war later halted by a fragile cease-fire.

"For the Trump administration, the goal is another military incursion. They will justify their actions by claiming it serves the freedom of Cubans," the Democratic pair said, calling on Congress to pass a war powers resolution to curb Trump's ability to make war without congressional authorization.

"Today, we must act to stop the destructive ambitions of imperialists and warmongers."

 

https://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2026/05/19/latam-us-Cuba-sanctions/1191779171773/

[JohnS]

This is just more sad news all around.

[REesq]

Agreed. You really have to feel for the ordinary people. I can't help but believe that there is a deal to be had there, but all of this public posturing on both sides doesn’t seem to help. We can only hope that there is some back channeling going on that will prove more fruitful. 

[rcarlson]

No shock here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/raul-castro-indictment-miami/

[Khimerah]

2 hours ago, rcarlson said:

No shock here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/raul-castro-indictment-miami/

The real question is how do they expect to get a 94 year old out of Cuba in a helicopter like they did Maduro? What’s odd too is the admin seemed more interested in keeping the Castros but getting rid of Canel. 

[MrBirdman]

6 hours ago, rcarlson said:

No shock here:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/raul-castro-indictment-miami/

But the first of many if negotiations don’t bear fruit. Signal is that no one is safe, so the Castros’ options are to retire comfortably with some of their ill-gotten gains or take an unplanned vacation to a US penitentiary. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the many hiccups is US unwillingness to grant anyone amnesty (meaning a new Cuban government could indict them and seek extradition). 

On the one hand, US policy towards Cuba has long been unreasonable and, lately, has directly contributed to the deaths of many people there. On the other hand, it’s clear that the people there might not be able to wrest power from the regime without help. Threatening the leaders with prison is probably the least violent means of doing so. Attacking the top directly calls into question the need for this devastating and deadly energy embargo, however. 

[VeguerosMAN]

24 minutes ago, MrBirdman said:

But the first of many if negotiations don’t bear fruit. Signal is that no one is safe, so the Castros’ options are to retire comfortably with some of their ill-gotten gains or take an unplanned vacation to a US penitentiary. Though I wouldn’t be surprised if one of the many hiccups is US unwillingness to grant anyone amnesty (meaning a new Cuban government could indict them and seek extradition). 

On the one hand, US policy towards Cuba has long been unreasonable and, lately, has directly contributed to the deaths of many people there. On the other hand, it’s clear that the people there can’t wrest power from the regime without help. Threatening the leaders with prison is probably the least violent means of doing so. Attacking the top directly calls into question the need for this devastating and deadly energy embargo, however. 

The energy crisis in Cuba has been going on since 2024 with constant blackouts every day.  The media didn't care to report until the US was involved in Jan.  

[MrBirdman]

2 hours ago, VeguerosMAN said:

The energy crisis in Cuba has been going on since 2024 with constant blackouts every day.  The media didn't care to report until the US was involved in Jan.  

You’ve been around the forum for a while and an active participant in Cuba conversations - I would hope you’re familiar enough with my posts apropos Cuba to know I’m well aware of the regime’s corruption and ineptitude. Nothing I’ve said above or anywhere implies the US is entirely or even primarily responsible for the state of the Cuba. 

It has, however, exerted considerable pressure on countries like Mexico to not send oil for humanitarian relief, even as the crisis exploded. So we have exacerbated the situation on the ground, and I am skeptical it has advanced regime change efforts enough to justify the cost. Kicking people when they’re down isn’t chivalrous and is rarely helpful, regardless of who put them there. 

[MrBirdman]

Just to fill out @rcarlson’s notice about the indictment, here is the full list of charged individuals from the current indictment. If anyone knows much about this crew beyond Raul, I’d be interested to know what you’ve heard.

RAUL MODESTO CASTRO RUZ,

LORENZO ALBERTO PEREZ-PEREZ,

EMILIO JOSE PALACIO BLANCO,

JOSE FIDEL GUAL BARZAGA,

RAUL SIMANCA CARDENAS,
and

LUIS RAUL GONZALEZ-PARDO RODRIGUEZ

(PS: can someone enlighten me as to whether Mr. Perez-Perez has a hyphenated name for some reason other than his parents sharing identical last names?)

PPS: I will be raising a glass to @Nino; his opinions on Cuba could be hard to pin down at times, yet always warranted careful listening and consideration. I suspect he’d approve of the indictment. Regardless, news like this always makes his absence felt here.

[El Presidente]

It looks like we are getting closer to the "end game".

Diaz/Raul are on the ropes and hoping to hold out until the midterms. US Admin closing in for the kill knowing they need a win pre November. 

 

[Duxnutz]

November seems close but lots of political water to flow under the bridge yet. 

[El Presidente]

[MrBirdman]

1 hour ago, El Presidente said:

US Admin closing in for the kill knowing they need a win pre November.

Exactly, and that is one reason of many why holding out for the midterms isn’t a real strategy (which does not, however, mean they aren’t relying on it!).

I nevertheless think it’s more likely they’re holding out while developments in the Middle East play out. Cuba might serve as a (very modest) distraction, but only if it comes about after a settlement to end the war. Assuming the US will act rationally or predictably is a fool’s errand these days, but the risk of an operation isn’t negligible. It hasn’t been widely reported how close the Maduro raid was to going off the rails - and the Cubans know it’s coming. 

So in the short term, they have a little ground to stand firm on, but the high tide is coming in quickly. 

[El Presidente]

58 minutes ago, MrBirdman said:

It hasn’t been widely reported how close the Maduro raid was to going off the rails - and the Cubans know it’s coming eventually. 

To be fair, every high risk operation walks the tightrope of failure. 

[Dadof3]

How centralized is Cuba at this point? If the couple of people at the top of the pyramid are toppled does the government collapse? If not I'm not sure what a couple of indictments will do.  

[El Presidente]

47 minutes ago, Dadof3 said:

How centralized is Cuba at this point? If the couple of people at the top of the pyramid are toppled does the government collapse?  if not I'm not sure what a couple of indictments will do.  

I don't think they want Cuba to collapse. Ideally, they want a pliant/stable/dominion and if it is eventually democratic, then all the better. 

In terms of the indictments. It motivates the Cuban political/military hierachy to factor in "plan B". 

[JohnS]

53 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

To be fair, every high risk operation walks the tightrope of failure. 

Exactly. From an historic point of view, consider the outcome of the plans to extract the US hostages in Iran in 1980 in comparison to the plan to assassinate Osama bin Laden in 2011. One, a resounding success, the other a failure that brought the end of a political party's term in office. But it could have gone either way.

[VeguerosMAN]

13 hours ago, MrBirdman said:

You’ve been around the forum for a while and an active participant in Cuba conversations - I would hope you’re familiar enough with my posts apropos Cuba to know I’m well aware of the regime’s corruption and ineptitude. Nothing I’ve said above or anywhere implies the US is entirely or even primarily responsible for the state of the Cuba. 

It has, however, exerted considerable pressure on countries like Mexico to not send oil for humanitarian relief, even as the crisis exploded. So we have exacerbated the situation on the ground, and I am skeptical it has advanced regime change efforts enough to justify the cost. Kicking people when they’re down isn’t chivalrous and is rarely helpful, regardless of who put them there. 

Most Cubans in Miami and in people in the island want a total meltdown of the current regime. Therefore, it would be counteractive to help the regime in any way. We both know Russian oil didn't even last a month. You have the right to be skeptical about the US tactics, but on the other hand, I believe it would be chaotic to send them any oil for "humanitarian" relief, as average people won't even see that oil. The regime and their military will benefit from the oil relief while regular folks will be holding their "you know what" like it has always been.  

[MrBirdman]

22 hours ago, VeguerosMAN said:

I believe it would be chaotic to send them any oil for "humanitarian" relief, as average people won't even see that oil.

I keep hearing that but the reality is that when more oil was coming in the situation wasn’t as bad. Insiders can use some of the oil themselves, but they can’t sell it to China anymore (as they did with Venezuelan shipments) because they lack any means of getting it there. 

If the oil embargo has shown us anything, it’s that the old “nothing makes it to the people anyway” refrain was just a way sugar coating policies to “help” the Cuban people through deprivation. 

How one balances the cost/benefit of a policy is their prerogative, but ignoring the human cost of regime change efforts is a species of intellectual and moral inconsistency that frequently appears in discussions about US policy towards Cuba. 

[MrBirdman]

On 5/21/2026 at 5:48 AM, El Presidente said:

To be fair, every high risk operation walks the tightrope of failure. 

Certainly. That’s not commonly recognized among the public, I suspect, and a failure would probably carry a high political price. That was more my point.

Of course maybe I’m wrong about Americans' perception of special ops prowess. The Rock was a huge hit here despite its implication that a fortified position held by a group of our elite troops could be overcome by a nerdy scientist and a geriatric parolee!

[Dadof3]

6 hours ago, MrBirdman said:

Certainly. That’s not commonly recognized among the public, I suspect, and a failure would probably carry a high political price. That was more my point.

Of course maybe I’m wrong about Americans' perception of special ops prowess. The Rock was a huge hit here despite its implication that a fortified position held by a group of our elite troops could be overcome by a nerdy scientist and a geriatric parolee!

That geriatric parolee had held a license to kill and enjoyed his martinis shaken not stirred.

[JohnS]

6 hours ago, MrBirdman said:

Of course maybe I’m wrong about Americans' perception of special ops prowess. The Rock was a huge hit here despite its implication that a fortified position held by a group of our elite troops could be overcome by a nerdy scientist and a geriatric parolee!

Without getting too much off-topic, Michael Bay's topped "The Rock" by making a film about oil-drillers drilling a gigantic asteroid headed for Earth. Perhaps, even more believable? 🤣