Fresh off the successful capture of Venezuelan autocrat Nicolás Maduro and the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Donald Trump and his allies have set their sights on another US adversary: Cuba.

“Cuba’s at the end of the line,” Trump told more than a dozen Latin American leaders during a conference at the White House last week. “Cuba’s in its last moments of life as it was.” Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of Trump’s closest foreign policy advisers, was just as bullish a day later: “The liberation of Cuba is upon us.”

The US, it appears, is doubling down on regime change in Havana. But Trump should take time to consider his options. His administration can reach a historic diplomatic agreement with Cuba without resorting to this resource-intensive and risky strategy. Pragmatic negotiations with the Cuban government — not long-term economic strangulation of the island, a military takeover or a decapitation of the leadership — is a more effective way to bolster US security in its own neighborhood.

Fortunately, Trump is amenable to talks with the Cubans. Secretary of State Marco Rubio is engaged in negotiations with Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, the gatekeeper and grandson of former Cuban leader Raúl Castro, who retains significant authority on the island. At the same time, the Trump administration has reinforced the economic embargo on Cuba, authorized the DoJ to explore criminal charges against senior Cuban officials, and instituted a tariff regime against any country which engages in oil trade with the island. The administration’s strategy is now clear: increase pain to the point where Havana must surrender to US demands.

The strategy itself is not new. US policy on Cuba has been longstanding: the embargo will remain until the government releases all political prisoners, institutes multi-party democracy, and accepts free, fair, and transparent elections. Except for the Obama administration’s short-lived normalization of relations with Havana, US presidents have intensified pressure on Cuba. The hope is that, over time, the regime would either negotiate a democratic transition or buckle outright.

Yet the Cuban regime has consistently proven sturdier than US officials anticipated. Its monopoly on force is uncontested, and the Cuban security services are highly proficient at snuffing out dissent. There is no organized democratic resistance movement on the island. The regime itself has used US economic pressure as a scapegoat for its poor management of the Cuban economy.

This isn’t to suggest the Cuban government is in good shape — far from it. Electricity blackouts are now commonplace; imports are getting more expensive; and for those who don’t have access to dollars, many items remain out of reach. Venezuela, which used to send Cuba approximately 70,000 barrels of crude oil per day, is no longer shipping any after Washington effectively took control of its oil industry. Mexico, another oil supplier to Cuba, has stopped shipments thanks to pressure from the Trump administration.

Cuba has lost 10% of its GDP since 2019, and the dire economic situation on the island has compelled many working-age Cubans to flee. One estimate estimates that Cuba’s population has declined by a quarter in just four years.

The Trump administration is betting that these struggles mean it’s only a matter of time until the regime in Havana falls apart. Yet many US presidents have made the same gamble over the last 67 years, only to find the regime still standing.

Trump should not compound six decades of failure with more failure. This is an optimal time for talks. First, the US-enforced fuel cut-off to the island, combined with the Cuban economy’s problems, has given Trump significant leverage to push a favorable agreement. Second, Cuban officials have never been opposed to talking to the US, even during times when bilateral relations have sunk. Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel, although considered a Cuban Communist Party ideologue, has insisted that Havana is ready to sit down with Washington so long as this doesn’t infringe on Cuba’s political system.

Trump is right to put Cuba’s words to the test. But simply authorizing talks is not sufficient. The agenda needs to be reasonable as well. If the US touches on Cuba’s long-established red line — foreign-imposed internal political change on the island — diplomacy will collapse before it even has the chance to succeed.

The agenda should therefore focus on the big geopolitical issues which could strengthen US power in the Western Hemisphere. One possible trade is that in exchange for Cuba reducing its strategic relationship with US adversaries such as China and Russia, Trump can lift the oil embargo. His administration could also sign an executive order permitting US farmers to export more agricultural products to the island — to boost Cuba’s food supply — and lift the cap on remittances imposed back in his first term. All of this can be done without Congress lifting the trade embargo.

If dropping Washington’s decades-long fixation with regime change in Cuba can clear the way for tangible US policy wins, it’s a price worth paying.

---

Daniel R. DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a syndicated foreign affairs columnist for the Chicago Tribune.

DanDePetris

---