July 16, 2025
The hazard of “most strain” vs. the promise of “pragmatic engagement.”
Since Donald Trump returned to the White Home, expectations have been that his administration will use escalating sanctions to pursue regime change in Cuba—a lot as he did throughout his first time period. With Marco Rubio, beforehand the toughest of hardliners within the US Senate, now serving as secretary of state—and doubling as nationwide safety adviser—the stage seems set for a return to a punitive coverage of “most strain” to push the teetering Cuban economic system over the sting. “In 2019, the coverage was most strain, however we by no means received to most strain,” Mauricio Claver-Carone, then Trump’s particular envoy to Latin America, advised a Miami viewers in April. “And now we’re going to ramp up that strain.”
On June 30, the Trump White Home formally took step one to “ramp up” a marketing campaign of strain” in opposition to Cuba—within the type of National Security Presidential Memorandum-5. The directive explicitly states that it’s a “reissuance” of NSPM-5 from 2017—a word-for-word return to Trump’s insurance policies from his first time period—“on strengthening the coverage of the US towards Cuba,” with simply two amendments (defined under). NSPM-5 reiterates restrictions on journey and commerce with Cuba, with out explicitly increasing the restrictions that at the moment exist. However the directive additionally orders US businesses to revisit their laws on journey and commerce with Cuba by the tip of July—a sign that tighter restrictions and extra punitive sanctions may very well be forthcoming later this summer time.
Invoking the brand new directive, final week the State Division levied sanctions in opposition to Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel and two of his ministers, to mark the fourth anniversary of the July 11, 2021, protests in Cuba through the pandemic. The sanctions encompass completely denying visas to the Cuban leaders—a meaningless penalty.
To know the implications of NSPM-5, The Nation sat down with two Cuba specialists, William M. LeoGrande and Geoff Thale, who’ve co-authored a complete new examine, “US-Cuban Relations: A Realist Case for Pragmatic Engagement.” Their report, performed for the Quincy Institute for Accountable Statecraft, asserts that the “nationwide curiosity of the US can be higher served by resetting US coverage towards Cuba, embarking on a path of engagement aimed toward finally normalizing relations.” Within the following Q&A, LeoGrande and Thale critique Trump’s hostile Cuba coverage—and supply an alternate course of engagement way more more likely to serve the pursuits of the US and the Cuban individuals.
—Peter Kornbluh
The Nation: On June 30, President Trump issued Nationwide Safety Presidential Memorandum 5—setting the stage for his second-term Cuba coverage. Besides the directive is sort of similar to the one he issued throughout his first time period. What’s Trump making an attempt to perform by reissuing a coverage package deal that has largely remained in place since 2017?
William M. LeoGrande: The brand new NSPM is a reinstatement and reaffirmation of the sanctions package deal Trump introduced in 2017 when he repudiated President Obama’s normalization coverage. It indicators a continuation of the coverage of hostility however doesn’t seem to dramatically enhance sanctions. In some methods, it’s much less extreme than the “most strain” coverage Trump imposed in 2019 beneath the affect of nationwide safety adviser John Bolton.
Present Difficulty
There seems to be a tug of struggle underway on Trump’s overseas coverage staff between pro-sanctions interventionists like Marco Rubio and MAGA skeptics who’re cautious of overseas entanglements. The “America First” faction would favor to depart Cuba on the again burner by reaffirming the established order relatively than escalating US involvement. And that’s what NSPM-5 does.
However lots will depend upon the small print of the brand new laws implementing the coverage, and nothing forecloses Trump from imposing new sanctions sooner or later, as he did in his first time period.
Geoff Thale: Agreed. Reissuing NSPM 5 is extra a gesture than a considerable shift in coverage. Present sanctions already limit most commerce with Cuba, restrict journey to the island, and put some strain on overseas guests and overseas traders. Issuing NSPM 5 permits the administration to speak robust on Cuba with out doing something new.
TN: The brand new NSPM is sort of similar to the previous NSPM, with just some phrase adjustments. Are you able to clarify the distinction between them, and why the brand new language is essential?
WML: There are two substantive adjustments within the new NSPM. First, it directs the State Division to replace the so-called “Restricted Entities” listing—an official listing created by Trump throughout his first time period of Cuban enterprises with which US residents and firms are banned from doing enterprise. And it expands the factors of the listing to incorporate entities that function “on behalf of” the Cuban armed forces, not simply ones operated by the armed forces. The brand new listing, together with a listing of prohibited lodges, was launched on July 11, however it merely provides seven new lodges to listing—not a drastic change.
The opposite important change within the new NSPM prohibits “oblique” in addition to “direct” transactions with entities on the “Restricted” listing. Presumably, an oblique transaction can be one which goes via some middleman entity that isn’t listed.
GT: Including the phrases “and oblique” would possibly counsel that the administration might pursue what are referred to as “secondary sanctions”—penalties in opposition to entities from different international locations (comparable to Spain or Canada) that do enterprise with Cuba. However the “Restricted Entities Record” is a listing of Cuban enterprises tied to the navy with whom US residents and firms can’t do enterprise. It doesn’t apply to third-country entities, at the very least in its current kind.
However secondary sanctions, if imposed, may very well be very damaging to the Cuban economic system. They may drive present overseas traders and buying and selling companions to withdraw from Cuba, and they’d definitely deter new traders, at a time when Cuba urgently wants onerous foreign money and overseas funding. Although they may, paradoxically, supply new alternatives for Russian and Chinese language funding as others withdraw.
TN: The NSPM orders US businesses to replace their Cuba laws inside 30 days. We are going to probably know what these are by the start of August. What can we count on when it comes to future restrictions on the precise to journey for academic excursions comparable to those The Nation results in Cuba?
WML: Surprisingly, the NSPM seems to depart group people-to-people journey intact by spelling out the circumstances beneath which it’s licensed. In fact, Trump can all the time add new sanctions on journey, remittances, and many others., as he did throughout his first time period. However the brand new NSPM is extra a reaffirmation of the established order than it’s an escalation of sanctions.
GT: For the reason that NSPM announcement, the administration has added seven lodges—together with the Gran Aston in Havana the place some academic tour teams have stayed—to the “prohibited” listing. New laws within the subsequent month definitely might create extra obstacles for journey. However, general, the NSPM appears to protect nonacademic academic journey, and journey to “help the Cuban individuals.” So important new restrictions on journey appear unlikely.
TN: Trump has touted his Cuba insurance policies as “most strain.” However you’re co-authors of a brand new, and intensely well timed, coverage examine—“US-Cuban Relations: A Realist Case for Pragmatic Engagement”—that presents a cogent argument for a really completely different method. What are the origins of this examine? What’s “pragmatic engagement”?
GT: You understand, it turned clear through the 2024 election season that nationwide safety arguments have been the one compelling set of arguments which may encourage both a Democratic or a Republican administration to alter course on Cuba. So in the summertime of 2024 we pulled collectively a set of consultants on Cuba coverage with whom we might seek the advice of on suggestions for a brand new coverage method targeted on nationwide safety. We did one-on-one interviews and drafted this coverage paper round nationwide curiosity arguments.
WML: In assessing overseas coverage choices, realists look first on the nationwide curiosity, so we requested ourselves what coverage towards Cuba would greatest advance a spread of US pursuits. We targeted on the priorities President Trump has voiced with regard to the Western Hemisphere: managing migration, containing the affect of US world rivals, halting the movement of narcotics, and securing entry to strategic minerals.
A practical engagement coverage is one which adapts US goals to our capabilities. In different phrases, what works? What may be executed by the US unilaterally, at low price, with little draw back danger, to advance our goals. Within the paper we argue that US goals usually tend to be superior by participating with Cuba relatively than by sustaining a coverage of sanctions and hostility, which hasn’t superior US pursuits regardless of being in place for greater than 60 years.
GT: President Trump’s overseas coverage has targeted on defending US nationwide pursuits, and US safety. In Latin America, particularly, that coverage has targeted on migration points, on limiting the affect of China and Russia, and on drug coverage. We argue that these US pursuits can be extra successfully superior by participating with Cuba than by sustaining or additional tightening our embargo.
An instance: Cuba’s weakened economic system has led to a wave of migration; hardening our border can gradual that wave however not cease it. And tightening the screws on the Cuban economic system will solely contribute to migration pressures. The Trump administration has suspended dialogue with Cuba on migration points, making migration administration even tougher. Reengaging with Cuba on migration talks, and steps to ease financial pressures that drive migration (particularly steps which may assist the Cuban personal sector) would serve our nationwide curiosity extra successfully than a coverage of most strain would.
TN: Cuba is already in a dire financial scenario. What are the humanitarian penalties of additional destabilizing Cuba economically?
WML: US sanctions have performed a significant position within the present humanitarian disaster on the island, together with the Covid pandemic and coverage errors by the Cuban authorities. Extra intense sanctions imply a deeper disaster, growing pressures for emigration, lowering the Cuban authorities’s capability to cooperate on problems with mutual curiosity like narcotics interdiction, and opening the door to China and Russia as they arrive to Cuba’s help. None of those outcomes serve US pursuits.
GT: Meals shortages and malnutrition are already points in Cuba, and the nation is receiving help from the World Meals Program. Power scarcity means frequent blackouts. The healthcare system is struggling to supply primary companies. Tightening the US embargo additional, via secondary sanctions or different measures, goes to extend starvation and human struggling, lower hope, and drive additional migration.
Well-liked
“swipe left under to view extra authors”Swipe →
TN: Given the dire scenario on the island, what are the following steps {that a} prudent and “pragmatic” US coverage ought to take?
GT: First, we may also help the Cuban economic system and the personal sector there by taking Cuba off the listing of “State Sponsors of Terror.” This inaccurate designation deters overseas companies, banks, and governments from interacting with Cuba, and makes it a lot tougher for the personal sector to hold out worldwide monetary transactions. We must always allow what’s referred to as “correspondent banking,” so that personal companies in Cuba have the flexibility to open US financial institution accounts and function in common banking channels. We must always let US traders, and which means largely Cuban People, put money into personal and cooperative companies in Cuba. All of these are straightforward measures that might assist the Cuban economic system and the personal sector and ease the pressures that drive migration. Clearly, we must always make it simpler for humanitarian help teams to ship meals, medication, and different provides with out the restrictions and pink tape that at the moment exist.
These are all first steps. We have to be sensible and acknowledge that they received’t remodel Cuba, or US-Cuban relations in a single day. However they might set us on a path that serves US nationwide and safety pursuits.
WML: We must always interact! That’s the primary lesson of the Obama–Raul Castro breakthrough to normalize relations in December 2014 which efficiently superior US pursuits earlier than Trump reverted to a coverage of perpetual hostility.
Engagement is feasible and productive. In the course of the two years that Obama’s coverage was in place, the US and Cuba reestablished diplomatic relations and signed 22 bilateral cooperation agreements on problems with mutual curiosity. Academic and cultural exchanges and journey flourished, enriching each international locations. New financial hyperlinks have been established. Cuban and Cuban American households have been reunited. And the 2 governments for the primary time opened diplomatic discussions about robust points like human rights and property claims.
Engagement is in style. United States allies around the globe cheered Obama’s coverage, particularly in Latin America. Opinion in the US was overwhelmingly constructive, even amongst Republicans. By the tip of the Obama administration, even the vast majority of Cuban People in Miami favored lifting the embargo.
Engagement is unavoidable. Cuba is just 90 miles away and it’s not going wherever. Over time, even Republican presidents have realized that there are some issues Washington can’t clear up unilaterally. That realization led virtually all of them to interact diplomatically with Cuba on one difficulty of one other, virtually all the time with constructive outcomes. Solely Obama had the braveness to aim full normalization, and he made extra progress in two years than all his predecessors and successors collectively have made in additional than half a century.
Extra from The Nation
Since 1979, the US has been in perpetual financial, navy, and political fight with the Iranian state. The one distinction now could be that bombs are falling.
Imperfect as they have been, our founding fathers asserted that liberty and human dignity are basic human values. A struggle with Iran repudiates them.
But mainstream US media shops and partisan politics are routinely oblivious to risk of oblivion.
What was true earlier than continues to be true now: There is no such thing as a navy resolution to this battle. Solely diplomacy and a dedication to peace will work.
