Related videos:
The Cuban chancellor, Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, raised his voice again this Saturday from his account on X —formerly Twitter— denouncing a “persistent electromagnetic interference in the Caribbean, particularly over the airspace of Venezuela.”
In his publication, he linked this phenomenon to the “offensive and extraordinary military deployment of the United States in the region.” According to Rodríguez Parrilla, this maneuver is part of an escalation of military aggression and “psychological warfare” with clear objectives: “to forcefully overthrow” the Venezuelan regime.
The report comes in the context of rising tensions in the Caribbean, following recent actions by the U.S. government —such as the announcement of the closure of airspace over Venezuela, issued by Donald J. Trump— and signs of increased military presence in the region.
From Havana, diplomatic warnings have taken on an increasingly urgent tone. In addition to the recent denunciation by the Cuban Foreign Minister of a “persistent electromagnetic interference” over Venezuela, the regime has asserted that any military action by Washington against Caracas is not just a threat to Venezuela but to all of “Our America.”
In an official statement from September, the Cuban regime called for "international support" to prevent what it deemed an imminent war between the U.S. and Venezuela, warning that direct aggression would have "incalculable consequences" for the peace and stability of the region.
The Deputy Foreign Minister, for his part, was more explicit: he denounced that Washington might be seeking to "violently overthrow" the Venezuelan regime, which the Trump administration directly associates with the drug trafficking operations of the Cartel de los Soles.
Although Havana has declared "total and complete" support for Nicolás Maduro, it has avoided publicly committing to a military intervention in his favor. In a recent interview, Rodríguez Parrilla refused to answer whether Cuba would engage in conflict in the event of an invasion of Venezuela, arguing that its support would be of a political and diplomatic nature.
This clear formal distancing—a promise of solidarity, but a refusal to respond with arms—is interpreted as a precautionary measure by the Cuban regime: although ideologically aligned with Caracas, it is aware of the high cost that would come with engaging in an armed conflict against the U.S. Especially at a time when the internal crisis on the island is worsening.
Nonetheless, the joint statements from Cuba and Venezuela hint at a veiled warning: any aggressive intervention by the United States against Caracas could trigger "unpredictable regional effects."
From Havana, the narrative suggests that an attack on Venezuela would be equivalent to aggression against all of Latin America, and thus could "activate" their solidarity in ways not yet specified.
For Cuba, the implication of a U.S. military escalation in the Caribbean represents a direct risk. Not only due to its geographic proximity but also because of what it could mean in terms of regional stability, mass migrations, and international pressure on allied regimes.
For this reason, Havana today seeks to mix a strong rhetoric—denouncing "psychological warfare," "interference," "threats," and "aggression"—with a calculated ambiguity regarding its possible military involvement.
In this context, solidarity with Caracas serves both to reaffirm a "lounge" anti-imperialist stance and to caution Washington: any escalation in the Caribbean could have consequences beyond Venezuela. However, at the moment, the Cuban regime prefers to remain on the sidelines militarily. A decision of prudence, but also of survival.
Filed under: