Cuba’s government delivered a message of both confrontation and openness this Monday from the United Nations. Addressing the Council on Human Rights in Geneva, Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez warned that the island “will defend with the greatest vigor and courage” its sovereignty against what it characterized as a deliberate attempt at economic strangulation by Washington.
Defense of Sovereignty and a Call for Dialogue
Despite this strong stance, Rodríguez assured that Cuba also has a “disposition for dialogue with the United States” under specific conditions. He declared, “The Cuban people will defend with the greatest vigor and courage, in close unity and broad consensus, their right to free determination, independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and the constitutional order.”
This warning followed a denunciation of an executive order signed January 29th by the U.S. President, which Havana claims seeks to provoke an energy crisis by threatening tariffs on countries exporting oil to Cuba. Rodríguez stated, “The executive order of January 29th by the president of the United States declares collective punishment of the Cuban people and proposes to create a humanitarian catastrophe through energy siege.”
Rodríguez questioned, “Can a great power allow itself to try to destroy a small nation of peace, provoke a humanitarian tragedy, destroy its national culture, subject a noble and solidarity people to genocide under the crude pretext of national security?” Cuba intends to “prevent a humanitarian crisis in Cuba even if we go through deprivation and suffering,” and will “persist, find creative solutions to all difficulties, and mitigate humanitarian damage.”
The country currently produces almost half of the crude oil it consumes, possesses refining capacity, and is investing in solar energy.
A Conditional Offer of Engagement
Following the firm tone, the Foreign Minister left open a diplomatic avenue. He stated, “We will also be willing to engage in dialogue with the United States based on sovereign equality and international law, mutual respect, reciprocal benefit, without preconditions or interference in internal affairs.” This dialogue, he suggested, should aim for “a civilized relationship within our differences and even promote cooperation in areas where possible.”
Broader Concerns About the Global Order
Rodríguez also addressed the global stage, warning of an increasingly “dangerous and challenging” scenario marked by the modernization of nuclear arsenals, the integration of emerging technologies into weapons systems, “aggressive militaristic rhetoric,” and increased military spending. He criticized what he termed a “globalized dictatorship” and the “philosophy of dispossession” as the U.S.’s “exceptional and supreme right to conquest and the utilize of force.”
He expressed support for protests in Minnesota, stating, “We admire the people of Minnesota in their community resistance.”
The Cuban message to the UN combined warnings of resistance against perceived economic aggression with an offer of dialogue under strict conditions. Havana maintains that Washington is attempting to cause a humanitarian collapse through energy pressure, while asserting its willingness to talk if its terms are met. The current situation remains characterized by public tensions and limited technical contacts.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Cuba’s primary concern regarding the U.S. Executive order?
Cuba believes the executive order signed January 29th by the U.S. President seeks to create a humanitarian catastrophe through an energy siege by threatening tariffs on countries exporting oil to Cuba.
What conditions did Cuba set for dialogue with the United States?
Cuba stated it is willing to engage in dialogue with the U.S. Based on sovereign equality, international law, mutual respect, reciprocal benefit, without preconditions, and without interference in internal affairs.
What is Cuba’s stance on its ability to withstand economic pressure?
Cuba insists it will prevent a humanitarian crisis, even if it means enduring deprivation and suffering, and will find “creative solutions” to mitigate damage.
Given these complex and often opposing positions, what role might international mediation play in fostering a more constructive dialogue between Cuba and the United States?
