Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: Foreign.
[00:00:05] Speaker B: Of we the People, tackling current issues, both political and legal, with common sense.
As we the People, we must bring common sense back to make our lives better.
Only on NOW Media tv.
[00:00:23] Speaker A: Good evening and welcome to we the People. I am your host, Alina Gonzalez Dockery.
Tonight we begin a series on one of the most consequential issues in the Western Hemisphere. US Cuba relations.
Something that has dominated over 60 years and what real policy, law and strategy looks like right now.
For over 60 years, the United States has maintained a comprehensive economic embargo on Cuba that covers trade, finance, travel and investments.
This isn't some ad hoc policy. It's codified in law and reinforced by statute after statute passed by Congress and implemented by the Executive branch.
In early 2026 under President Trump, key elements of that strategy have been re energized, including a national emergency declaration that targets not only Cuba, but also countries that continue to supply it with oil, such as Mexico, China, Russia.
A measure designed to squeeze the regime at its most vulnerable point.
And tonight, we start with two foundational questions every American should understand.
What gives the US the legal authority to sanction Cuba?
What strategic purpose does this pressure serve and is it working?
I can tell you, prior to 2026, it's been kind of flatlined. It really hasn't been pushed even during the Kennedy administration, after the Cuban Missile Crisis, after the debacle that was the Bay of Pigs, President Trump is now putting full force behind these federal laws.
So let's start with the legal foundation.
The US Embargo on Cuba didn't start on a whim. It began with a series of clear legal authorities.
In 1962, President Kennedy adopted an embargo on trade under authority granted by Congress in the Foreign Assistance act of 1961 and the Trading with the Enemy act, which empowered the President to regulate or restrict trade with hostile nations. So therefore, the these acts give solely the right to enforce to the Executive branch.
So when you hear a lot of blustering from certain congressional members or that Congress should be in charge of this, not necessarily because Congress has already given that authority to the President and its Executive Branch.
Over time, Congress strengthened and expanded those sections, including with the Cuban Democracy act of 1992, which restricted U.S. trade and tightened enforcement.
Then in 1996, you had the passing of the Helms Burton act, which codified the embargo and extended its reach to foreign companies dealing in property seized by Cuba.
And then in 2000, trade sanctions reform and Export Enhancement act, which permitted limited agricultural exports under strict conditions.
All of These laws are implemented and enforced by the Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control, also known as ofac, which regulates Cuban sanctions in the Cuban Assets Control Regulations, the detailed rules that govern what Americans and foreign entities can and cannot do in relation to Cuba.
So you see, this isn't just an abstract legal text. It's the architecture of US Policy as it pertains to Cuba as a result of Fidel Castro and the Soviet Union, and then once the collapse of the Soviet Union, the troop, you know, the, the fidelista patriotism type of regime.
And as if you recall, Jose Pereira eloquently pointed out that like, like Venezuela, the regime in Cuba is like a mafia.
This is not a government controlled by laws that they pertain to. It is what is good for the people of Cuba, does not reflect upon those in power and the elites of the Cuban regime.
So these laws that I just briefly mentioned define what sanctions look like. It defines how far pressure can go, and it defines the conditions under which sanctions can be lifted or eased. And it also gives greater teeth to what President Trump is trying to achieve, as well as through Marco Rubio, who again, Secretary of State Rubio, even when he was a senator in expressed this was one of his goals.
And after the capture and extraction of Maduro from Venezuela just a little over a month ago, that is giving renewed hope to the Cuban exiles here in the United States and elsewhere as to perhaps we will finally see a regime change. But yet again, there is no guarantee of that.
So now let's talk about strategy.
According to reporting from major international outlets, including Reuters and regional press, President Trump's 2026 policy toward Cuba is not just about maintaining the embargo. It's not keeping doing the same thing, being the hamster on the wheel and expecting a difference.
It's about active pressure with a goal. So Trump is really putting the pressure on.
And the reason for this is to force the Cuban regime to change behavior that the US deems hostile to American interests.
In late January 2026, the administration declared a national emergency regarding Cuba and announced the possibility of tariffs on countries that continue to sell oil to Havana, which directly was in response to how Mexico was still providing oil to Cuba. And we're going to get into why Cuba's electrical grids are failing, because that is not something that just happened because of what occurred on January 3rd.
This is significant, this latest round of expansion going, we are going to sanction countries providing goods contrary to the embargo to Cuba.
It means we are not just enforcing an embargo we are targeting Cuba. The full lifeline of Cuba is energy without fuel, electricity, transportation and industry crying to a halt without fuel. The Mafioso government heads to include the President of Cuba can no longer sell their oil supplies to China, to Iran and stuff for money.
And the money does not go to the infrastructure to help the Cuban people. It goes in the pockets of those that are in the elite.
And as the administration frames it, Cuba's actions aren't just economic choices. They're tied to behavior the US considers hostile, including support for malign actors abroad, which means opening their arms to possible terrorists. I mean, we saw that even after 9, 11. For those of you that might not remember, in 2021 we had horrific terrorist attack.
It also goes to how Cuba was providing security services, spy networks and stuff for hostile countries against the U.S.
it also is making sure that we are disrupting any alignment with any regional autocracies that are against the US and its security interests.
And remember, Cuba's 90 miles away from the southern tip of Florida. I mean, it's right there. That's why it is also a key strategic point for evading potential threats directed at us.
So now let's take a national security perspective. And this is not trivial.
Pressure has a purpose.
It isolates regimes that support hostile interests. It constrains their resources. It communicates consequences for behavior counter to U.S. interests.
And you don't have to take my word for it.
Go do the research. Look up. Ask ChatGPT to check out the Department of State.
This has been the thrust of US policy since the 1960s. Using economic leverage to influence political outcomes abroad.
That's why the Helms Burton act doesn't just punish trade. It penalizes foreign entities that profit from property expropriated from Cuban exiles who are American citizens here in the US and now we are starting to see lawsuits that are being upheld and people getting rewards from these very same companies.
This is an assertion of legal rights rooted in these U.S. statutes.
But here's where a practical, results oriented analysis matters. Sanctions are tools, not an end in themselves. If sanctions are meant to change behavior, then we should ask, had the sanctions as applied today produce results that align with their goals. The answer would be no. The regime has it stands strong 60 some years later.
Right now, the Cuban economy is under severe strain. Fuel supplies are precarious, blackouts struck for hours, and the population is feeling the pain.
But the Cuban regime has not collapsed, nor has it fundamentally changed its political strategic posture.
So it doesn't mean that our sanctions are legitimate. It just means that we need to evaluate the effectiveness, not just the intent of these sanctions, because doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity from my own perspective as a political analyst, and for those of you who watch regularly will understand that I do come from a little bit center right of center, but I also understand the Caribbean context deeply. My family has lived it. I have grown up with this.
And it's clear that the sanctions must be pursued with strategic clarity, and benchmarks have to be stated for success. Just like in any endeavor, you have to have measurable outcomes.
Pressure without a pathway to change is just suffering. And that brings us back to the heart of this episode.
Is the pressure the US Is applying now actually moving Cuba toward outcomes that benefit both the US Interests and the Cuban people, or is it a policy of endurance without result?
That's the real question, and that's what we're going to get into next after this. Commercial break.
Welcome back.
When the United States and Cuba say they are in dialogue, what do they actually mean?
Because this is all over the news, oh, the president, Cuba is willing to have dialogue with President Trump. And then President Trump says, oh, we're having communications.
We're going to peel back the rhetoric to reveal the reality of diplomatic engagement, or the lack of it between Washington and Havana.
So first question, is this really a negotiation or is it just communication without consequences and people are just paying lipstick service?
At least right now it's probably more lip service and huffing and puffing and making stances.
So it's really going to depend on who's going to make the move first.
Now, the answer matters as to whether this is real or just lip service. And that's because for Americans and for Cubans alike, the stakes go beyond press releases. They determine whether pressure leads to change or simply to stalemate to continue the same.
According to reporting from Reuters, Cuba's government is in communication with the United States, but that's not the same as formal dialogue or negotiations.
Cuba's deputy foreign minister, Carlos Fernandez de Cosio, said plainly, we have had exchanges of messages. We have embassies, we've had communications, but we cannot say we have had a table of dialogue.
That distinction is more than a bureaucratic nuance. It tells you exactly what where we are talking around issues, not about the issues that actually change the dynamic, but also it's glaring to know that what the US Wishes the outcome to be versus what the Cuban regime's, you know, ultimate goal is are not anywhere near each other. They couldn't be more just, opposed, more opposite.
So let's put this in plain terms.
Cuba will talk, but only if those talks respect sovereign equality and international law and do not include coercion or preconditions. So in other words, we'll talk, but don't tell us how to change the regime. Don't tell us that we need to embrace democracy or embrace humanitarian efforts towards our own people.
It's just another diplomatic way of saying we're open to conversation. We're not negotiating anything that may threaten our political system, our power and our sovereignty.
The Mafia does not want to hand over the reins and admit that they have to go.
Look at Venezuela. We're now in that transition process and Cuba's red lines are clear.
Its constitution socialist framework is a non negotiable. They're not going to give up power.
To hell with the people. They want power.
Its political system and government structure are off the table.
So from that regime's perspective, the stance is consistent with decades of Cuban foreign policy.
Assert sovereignty, avoid coercion, and never ever cede ground just to calm external pressures.
That's partly why dialogue as Cuba defines it doesn't necessarily lead to negotiation, especially not on core political or constitutional issues.
Now let's turn to the United States side.
President Trump has publicly stated the US has begun talks with the highest people in Cuba and expressed optimism about a possible possible deal. Again, Trump is not necessarily what he says, it's what the reaction is or what actions happen after he speaks. But he always has this hyperbolic, bombastic way of speaking, and he himself has not specified what a deal would look like.
And from all intents and purposes, from everything that Secretary of State Rubio has stated and Trump himself in other interviews, the end game is one for this regime to get out of power, to allow freedom to occur in Cuba and allow democracy and the democratic constitution that Cuba once had be restored.
This does still give some hope to observers, but it also raises more questions. Talk between two governments mean many things, but they only count as dialogue. So when both are negotiating on substantive issues, when one is refusing to budge on substantive issues, how far are these communications going to go and what is next?
And right now, the substantive issues are the political reform, human rights, constitutional structure are precisely the ones Cuba's regime is saying, absolutely not.
So the gap is really the heart of the disagreement. One side says they're ready to discuss, the other says must protect the sovereignty first. It's never going to happen.
So from a common sense, right of center perspective, this dynamic reflects A deep strategic tension.
Nobody wants to change their behavior. Everybody is steadfast in their points of view.
And this disagreement continues. What sort of dialogue is there going to possibly be to be able to move the needle anywhere? It's not so then it's going to be what are the consequences?
What are the consequences when we start stepping it up through all of these acts? When this administration says we're putting more pressure on Cuba, we're going to put more pressure on Cuba's allies and those that want to deal with them and provide them supplies, such as oil, which the oil is the most precious supply that, that Cuba's needing.
So, and I apologize, I, I had a thought.
When you have one that's absolutely stating that this is their entitlement, they have their sovereignty. And another one that says, this one, we do not accept you as a legit and you need to go, any messages, any communications between these two is just semantics on the ground. In Cuba, people are enduring the harshest conditions.
They are enduring severe fuel shortages, widespread blackouts, rising food prices, prices and limited food availability.
And all the while, they're watching their political elites in Havana maintain their red lines and also enjoy a level of comfort that the Cubans do not know. You have Cubans that are using doors, the wood from the doors as fire so that they can cook food.
Meanwhile, US Officials insist continuing pressure is necessary until Cuba meets certain conditions or they fall.
And the issues in Havana will not discuss publicly in the current political climate. Of course they're going to deny it, but we saw this like even last year before the Venezuela ousters, before the hard line embargoes that Trump initiated against Venezuela oil and trying to stop and limit this, we started seeing huge blackouts throughout the island.
Enough with the dialogue.
I mean, this isn't about a dinner party. This isn't about inviting. Enough is enough. It is time to actually get a strategic plan in place in how they are going to force, not by the use of force, not using military, although that could be something later on. But I doubt they'll do that, how are they gonna toppled this house of cards so that maybe the people of Cuba can become free so that they can enjoy humanitarian needs again?
And let's. Before people start yelling and saying, oh this, you know, what's happening in Cuba is the US fault because of the embargo, let's remember something.
The embargo has specific exceptions. Medicines, medical equipment and certain food supplies are not part of the embargo.
But what has been happening is it's being sent and it's been found that the government keeps it for themselves or for those that are using the, the, the resource and stuff and not providing it to the people.
So I do an eye roll whenever I hear the. In talks, it's almost like, hell, we can liken it to the Russia, Ukrainian, pe.
I mean, oh, we got a deal. We don't have a deal. We're in talks. We're not in talks. I mean it, it's like enough with the diplomacy, enough with the talking. We need action. And I and the people both in Cuba and here deserve action.
So while these governments are debating and they're posturing and they got their chest puffed up, there has to be something enduring in the quietly relentless way that we are affecting this embargo. And that's where the change is. That is what has been happening now.
The Cuban people are living through island wide blackouts, often up to 15 hours a day.
A reality that began before the latest US actions and continued even when Venezuelan oil was still flowing.
So you got to ask yourselves, why, why were the Cuban electrical grids failing? Why was oil on a short, on the short side, if the oil existed, why are the lights still going out?
Because that answer, the answer to that very question changes how we evaluate the US policy and humanitarian responsibility we have to the Cuban people.
When we come back, we'll break that down clearly, factually and without slogans.
So tune right back in after this quick commercial break.
Before we go any further, we do need, we do need to clear this up because there's so much mis, misinformation out there because of Tick tock and social media and X.
And that narrative is not factual.
The Cuban people, the island of Cuba did not fall into a blackout overnight, not because of one executive order and not because one policy decision made in Washington by President Trump or through Secretary of State Rubio.
The truth is harder and more uncomfortable.
Cuba has been experiencing these island wide blackouts for years.
I still remember watching the news in shock last year when the entire island went dark because of the failure of their electrical grid.
And in speaking to those that I know that are still in Cuba, they tell me how they only get, if they're lucky, eight hours of electricity a day.
And this is all while Venezuelan oil was still flowing out of the tap.
So we're going to ask that honest question.
If the oil existed, why were the Cuban people suffering in the dark without proper electricity?
For years, Cuba depended heavily on Venezuelan oil.
A political alliance that traded subsidized crude for Cuban doctors and Technical support and security.
But by the mid-2020s that lifeline was already failing.
Venezuela's oil industry collapsed under corruption, mismanagement, decaying infrastructure and its own sanctions exposure.
Production dropped so dramatically that Venezuela could no longer supply Cuba at levels needed to keep the lights on, much less keep not only the lights, but also keep the money flowing to the pockets of those in, higher up in the government because they were selling off the oil supplies to China, Russia and others.
So by the time we reach 2024 and 2025, Cuba was receiving only a fraction of the oil it once depended on. Nowhere near enough to power an island wide electrical grid.
And here's the point. Even when oil arrived, Cuba's power plants often couldn't use it efficiently.
Why is that?
Because Cuba's electrical system is old, dangerously old.
Most thermoelectric plants date back decades.
Maintenance has been deferred, spare parts are scarce. The grid leaks, energy plants break down faster than they can be repaired.
So even with Venezuelan oil generation shortfalls were constant.
That's why blackouts of 10, 12 and 15 hours a day become routine. Before the most US actions, most recent US actions.
This matters because it changes the moral and policy calculation. Because everybody is, you know, a lot of voices are trying to put this, oh, this is Trump and Rubio and this is because of us. No, because there really hasn't been a clear push on these, on these laws to really put, you know, pressure, apply the boot to, to, to, to Cuba to and their regime to fall until recently.
So now let's talk honestly about the policy versus the humanitarian need.
There is no doubt that the average regular Joe blow Cuban is suffering and it is difficult.
And when you have things, shortfalls such as major infrastructure, not only electrical, which is devastating on its own, but then you have the lack of resources like proper hospital maintenance, medicines, food supplies, garbage.
I mean the people are suffering, but those in the ivory tower still eat very well.
So from a US policy standpoint, pressure exists for a reason.
The sanctions are meant to deny hostile regimes necessary resources.
Also to stop the tap of potential corrupt ways of getting money, limit the ability to project influence, which after the Venezuelan Maduro being retracted, and with the hope that we actually see a true transition from the Chavista regime to that one of democratic democracy in Venezuela.
Cuba's influences are being stripped little by little.
And then lastly, forced behavioral change through leverage. And the legal authority to that exists clearly and lawfully under U. S. Statutes codified since the 1960s all the way through 2000.
But humanitarian reality doesn't disappear just because policy is lawful.
When energy collapses, people suffer first, not political elites. I mean, people are having issues with maintaining their medicines if it needs to be refrigerated, how to cook, using wood and scraps of coal to be able to use to cook the limited food that they have.
And as someone with Cuban roots, I can tell you blackouts are not an inconvenience. They're destabilizing.
I speak to people I know that are still in Cuba, asking them this is why. Also it affects these lack of electricity, the breakdown of the electrical system of Cuba, also with the lack of sanitation infrastructure and such, is also heightening the risk of major diseases and viruses that are affecting Cuba today.
So the tension policymakers must confront without slogans, please, no more slogans. If pressure is meant to force reform, but the system shields itself and passes the cost to the civilians, then pressure alone doesn't create the leverage, it creates endurance.
This Cuban government has adapted through the decades after the fall of the Soviet Union, when the money stopped flowing in from the communist Soviets, it transitioned, it transformed. It's like a snake peeling off its skin and shaping itself, or more so, a chameleon.
The military and the party protect themselves, not the people. They protect themselves and ordinary Cubans are absorbing the shock.
So it doesn't mean the sanctions are wrong or the embargo is misplaced.
It means sanctions without precision create humanitarian fallout without any political gain. And that's what we've been witnessing for decades.
So what kind of pressure actually advances US interests without collapsing civilian life?
Because when humanitarian crisis is deepen, migration increases. As we have seen millions of Cubans fleeing their country, going through especially during the last admin under President Biden, through the Frontera, through Mexico.
And also that migration from Cuba is the younger, able bodied people that can work, the ones that are educated, leaving a an aging population in Cuba.
It also deepens the regional instability that grows within Cuba.
And leverage paradoxically shrinks because desperation doesn't produce the reform that is needed, it produces survival behavior.
So as we move forward, keep this in mind. Cuba's darkness didn't begin with US pressure, but pressure can make darkness deeper if it isn't paired with a realistic path forward.
So this is the challenge I give to Marco Rubio.
Figure out what is the actual path forward.
I seriously doubt we're going to see something like we did in Venezuela on January 3rd because there are distinct differences between Venezuela under the Chavez Maduro regime and the Fidelista regime of Cuba. One is, is that Venezuela still has fresh in their minds what it was like to be a free and democratic, affluent, abundant country.
Cuba, for the most part, does not because the Communist Fidelista regime has been in power since for 62 years.
So those that may have a memory of when even under Batista, and I'm not saying that dictator was, was a good option for the Cuban people, but it was a hell of a lot better than Fidel Castro and what is currently happening.
But under Batista, Cuba was one of the wealthiest Latin American countries.
It had an excellent education system.
Poverty was less than 20%. And that was because mainly made up of the rural areas where it was seasonal work due to the plantations, the sugar plantations.
Today, the Cubans are under a humanitarian crisis that is beyond imagination.
But yet the Cubans still believe, they still hold out hope. They're even stating that there is hope, that this is finally the nudge that will bring down this house of cards this regime is standing upon.
But more importantly, what is the dialogue supposed to be about? What is this let's talk and negotiate really mean when you have one side that is absolutely, emphatically not going to bend their knee?
How do we help those that are in Cuba to regain some dignity, to regain some semblance of a society and to ensure that they do have their medical needs taken care of, not worrying where their next meal is coming from or whether or not they're going to be able to cook or maintain any refrigeration.
And also let me reflect on this.
Remember that the vast majority of the Cuban people on the island of Cuba, their wages, their monthly wages or monthly income are so sparse that they are comically, ridiculously impoverished. The people, some receiving pensions of $6 a month. Let that sink in.
Next we'll look at what policy that balances leverage with humanitarian reality might actually look like, and whether Washington is willing to pursue it.
Stay with us as we tune back in after this.
At this point, we can say something with confidence.
What's happening in Cuba today is not simply morality play.
This is not good versus evil or not sanctions versus surrender.
It is the collision of lawful US Policy, failed economic systems, and real human consequences.
Pretending otherwise helps no one.
So the question we end with tonight is not whether pressure is justified. It's whether pressure is being used intelligently.
And maybe that's what we should be demanding, intelligent, measurable outcomes based on this new, new pressure that we're being, we're witnessing today as we've gone over in the first segment. The United States has every legal right and legitimate national security interest to sanction the Cuban government.
That authority is grounded in US Law, reinforced by decades of bipartisan legislation. You know what that means? That both Democrats and Republicans were behind it.
And justified by Cuba's alignment with hostile regimes such as Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, and a suppression of political freedom that has been a curse since Fidel Castro put the knife in the back of those that believed in him and its refusal to reform, to reform so that the Cuban people can even begin to at least survive or become stable. Forget I mean, thriving sounds like a dream.
Sanctions are not a moral stamp, standpoint, or statement.
It is supposed to be a strategic tool.
And like any tool, they must be judged by the results that are affected by it. Not intentions, not wordplay, not flopping at the lips.
If pressure hardens the regime, insulates its elites and collapses the civilian life without producing reform, then pressure alone is not a viable strategy.
It is inertia.
It's just futile.
So this is where the humanitarian reality enters the equation.
Not as an excuse, not as an emotional leverage, but as a policy factor.
Energy shortages don't just inconvenience the civilians, they destabilize societies. And that's what is the difference here with Trump, as compared to all of the administrations that have come and gone for the past 60 years through cutting off the oil. And yes, the people are going to hurt even more so than they already have been through that. That is what is going to be destabilizing this society, that perhaps knocks over this regime.
Because these energy shortages push people towards migration.
They break local economies, they weaken the civil institutions, and importantly, they don't automatically translate late into political reform, especially in tightly controlled systems like Cuba's.
It's not sympathy. This is analysis.
There has to be more than just the embargo. There has to be actual consequences. There has to be action taken. Look what happened in Venezuela. I'm not saying that we should go in and be stormtroopers and take out the President of Cuba.
Let me make that clear.
But what I'm saying is, is that there has to be more done to chokehold this regime into complete collapse.
So what would be the smarter approach?
One, we're not going to abandon the leverage that we are now seeing that we're having.
But we do have to refine it. So how do we refine it?
First, targeting regime revenue and the elite's own coffers, not blanket civilian suffering. We need to go after what hurts the most. It's the money that the regime has, the wealth.
And for those of you Go. Oh well, they're not wealthy. Look, they're suffering. Please take the wool out of your eyes. The regime has been siphoning the money, the energy, the food, the medicine that comes into the country for the people and have been selling it off or keeping it themselves. They have given more priority to the resorts and the elite hospitals than the poor people have that they cannot even get proper medical care.
Next, creating clear benchmarks for relief tied to measurable actions.
And lastly, allowing humanitarian energy corridors that keep hospitals, water systems and basic services running.
None of this requires trusting the Cuban government because the Cuban government cannot be trusted.
It requires trusting policy design.
Pressure works best when it's specific, conditional and credible.
Not endless, not vague, not symbolic, and definitely not wishy washy as we have seen in past administrations.
From my personal perspective, I say this as someone who understands both the policy world and, and what it meant to live under the Cuban reality post Fidez revolution.
Dignity matters, not political dignity. Human dignity matters.
When the policies ignored the cost to humans, it erodes the moral authority of those policies.
When humanitarian concerns ignores the political reality, it invites manipulation, which is what has been happening for decades.
The balance is difficult, but it's not impossible.
What's missing right now is not leverage.
What's missing is a clearly articulated end game. Not, oh, well, we would hope that the regime falls and we believe that it happens. No, let's clearly articulate. This is the strategy here is the end game, and this is how we're going to measure it and this is how we're going to achieve it.
So if that means stopping more tankers of oil that goes to Cuba, confiscating those under the embargo, sanctioning those countries that are still basically, you know, putting the thumb to, you know, thumb to the nose and saying, you know, basically, you can go where you want to go. Us, we're going to continue doing business with Cuba. That's where it has to go.
Bottom line, the Cuban government must be held accountable for the systemic failures and repression of the people.
And they do continue to repress. Because anybody who speaks out against the Cuban government, against the regime, the secret police, military forces, will break down the doors and arrest them. And they're not to be seen. Sometimes the United States is not off the hook. The US Must be honest about what its pressure can and cannot achieve.
And when it details what can be achieved, then how are we going to put forth that more pressure?
Humanitarian reality must be factored into every decision because the people are the ones suffering.
We cannot dismiss the humanitarian reality of the Cuban people.
This is not to be weaponized.
Unfortunately, this regime will weaponize their suffering and make it more so.
They have been putting the people through suffering for decades, but they'll tout that out. They'll show the suffering all the while still diverting all the income they can to their own personal gain.
Real leadership isn't loud, it is precise.
And my hope is, under Secretary of State Rubio, we will see that precision, real diplomacy, doesn't mean backing down either.
It means knowing where pressure produces results and where it simply produces pain.
And the pain isn't being felt by those in power in Cuba, those mafia heads, the regime.
The pain is felt by the people.
So tonight's conversation about Cuba isn't about nostalgia. It's not raggling in regaling, excuse me, in the stories that my parents would tell me or the books that I read of pre revolution times.
Tonight's conversation isn't about ideology either.
It's not about the rights and wrongs of democracy versus communism versus socialism or totalitarianism, regimes like those of Cuba.
And it isn't about choosing sides in a moral debate that ignores reality, which we are seeing so much on social media and also mainstream.
It's about policy that works.
The United States has clear and legal authority.
The United States has legitimate national security reasons to sanction the Cuban government.
The authority is grounded in law, reinforced by decades of bipartisan policy and justified by Havana's alignment with the hostile actors and its repression of its own people.
But sanctions are not a moral position. They are a strategic tool. And that tool that causes widespread civilian suffering without producing reform must be re examined, not abandoned, but redefined.
Cuba's energy crisis did not begin with US pressure. The blackouts were already lasting up to 15 hour days, even when Venezuelan oil was still arriving.
That tells us something important. The crisis is structural, systemic and longstanding.
Pressure alone does not fix a broken system. And humanitarian concern alone does not change the political behavior.
The path forward requires precision, strategy, targeted pressure, clear benchmarks and safeguards for those that are most affected that prevent civilian collapse while maintaining leverage over the regime. This is not weakness. It is strategy. And strategy matters. Because when policy fails, it's not governments that pay the price. It's the people.
That's the reality. And that's why we keep asking the hard questions here on we the People. I wish you all a good night. I am your host, Alina Gonzalez Dachry.
