Richard Feinberg, former director of the National Security Council (NSC) of the United States for Latin America, described in an analysis published by The Economist three possible military scenarios that Washington might consider against Cuba, warning that all options are problematic.
The first option outlined by Feinberg is a limited operation aimed at the high-level Cuban leadership, similar to the one carried out in Venezuela.
The second involves precision airstrikes to pressure the Cuban government into negotiations or to degrade its air defenses.
The third and most extreme scenario would be a large-scale invasion.
On the scenarios for attacking leadership, Feinberg was straightforward: "Raúl Castro would be their primary target."
The Economist warns that Cuba is not Venezuela: the island's geography, its political structure, and the likely internal resistance make any military operation uncertain in outcome and with considerable risks.
This debate occurs within the context of an escalation of pressure from the Trump administration, which includes economic sanctions and criminal charges filed against Raúl Castro, a campaign that analysts compare to the one preceding the fall of Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela.
According to a report by Politico from last Wednesday, the United States has plans ready and "only the order is missing."
The Pentagon and Southern Command have conducted planning sessions for various scenarios in Cuba, although without a confirmed presidential order.
Trump himself ruled out immediate action on May 21, stating, "No. There will be no escalation. I don't think it's necessary."
Axios reported last Thursday that the United States is testing plans to respond if Cuba falls into chaos, as part of a strategy of gradual pressure rather than immediate intervention.
The Cuban regime, for its part, viewed positively a meeting with the United States Southern Command reported this Saturday, while the Havana government accused Trump of resurrecting the 1996 case in reference to the downing of aircraft.
The Economist recalls that since the failed Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961 —organized by the CIA with exiled Cubans— the regime has used the American threat as a narrative of national pride and resistance, a narrative that is once again being activated in the face of pressure that Trump convened his security cabinet to assess on May 12.
The prevailing strategy of Washington appears to be escalated pressure —economic, diplomatic, and deterrent military— although the analysis itself from The Economist concludes that, if any of the three military options described by Feinberg were to be implemented, none would guarantee a favorable outcome for the United States.
Filed under: