The Cuban political scientist Julio Shiling, director of the Patria de Martí project, suggested this Monday that the option of not ruling out a military action by the United States in Cuba could, at this time, divert attention from the Middle East and give Washington greater maneuverability to complete its operations in Iran.
Shiling elaborated on the argument in an interview with Tania Costa, in the context of the ongoing armed conflict between the U.S. and Israel against Iran and the negotiations in Islamabad regarding a ceasefire and a new nuclear agreement.
"Iran's Islamic regime has been militarily destroyed, that is undeniable, but now the jihadist Iran is waging an unconventional war, primarily in public opinion, in the media environment of the West," the analyst stated.
Shiling warned that time is against the West: "The time that passesbenefits all the bad actors in the world, and it's not just jihadist Iran but also communist Cuba and continental socialism," he said.
According to the political scientist, the U.S. has fallen into a classic trap. "The United States has fallen, in my view, into a trap that both the Islamists and the communists love to exploit, and that is buying time," he stated, attributing the tactic to the Leninist theory of coexistence.
The consequence, according to Shiling, is paradoxical: "This militarily destroyed country is the one determining whether they meet, whether they don't meet, what agreements... it would seem that they have won the war," he said in reference to the regime of the ayatollahs.
That's where Cuba comes into play in their strategic equation. "The United States, if it were to take action in Cuba, would divert attention from the Middle East and that would give it more leeway to do the things it needs to do in Iran, such as finishing the destruction of key bridges, completing the destruction of electrical infrastructure, and entering and mining Iran's ports," he argued.
Regarding the Cuban regime, Shiling was unequivocal: "Cuban communism is not going anywhere unless there is military action or a serious threat of military action. They're not going, forget about it." He added that the nomenclature is willing to perpetuate itself in power in any form. "They are prepared to establish a tropical China; they are ready to have Caribbean Putinism—that's what they are willing to do, but they will never leave power voluntarily. They need to be removed."
The analyst dismissed the idea that Cuban leaders act out of ideological conviction: "Rather, they believe in the personal benefits they have gained from that mafia-like system," he stated.
Shiling's statements come days after the symposium "The Helms-Burton Act and Cuban Democracy," held on April 23 in Miami and organized by Patria de Martí, where the role of GAESA and the dollarization of the Cuban economy was also discussed as part of a democratic transition agenda.
Shiling's argument is supported by the data from the El Toque survey on options for Cuba, which gathered over 12,100 responses in just the first 48 hours: 60.4% of participants support a direct military intervention by the U.S. on the island, and 92% express being very dissatisfied with the current system.
It is not the first time that Shiling has defended this position. In March, the political scientist already raised the need for military intervention in Cuba, proposing federal charges against high-ranking officials of the regime, lawsuits against GAESA, and the use of drones against military targets. However, President Trump explicitly ruled out a direct intervention, and the head of Southern Command denied such plans, although critical voices like that of former British Ambassador Paul Webster Hare also warned that a military action would not benefit either the US or Cuba.
In the interview this Monday on CiberCuba, Shiling discussed his book "Democratización en Cuba". If you would like to receive a free copy in pdf format, click here and fill out your email and personal information to receive it by email.
Filed under: