The major cracks in the U.S. embargo

There are words that describe a reality and others that, in addition to describing it, seek to provoke a specific perception. The Cuban government prefers to speak of the "U.S. blockade," a term that evokes a complete siege, ships preventing the entry of goods, and an island cut off from the world. But does that image correspond to the entire reality?

In legal and economic terms, the U.S. sanctions against Cuba constitute a commercial and financial embargo, with significant restrictions, exceptions, and authorizations. They do not equate to a permanent naval blockade that physically hinders all trade with the island. This distinction is important, as words can also be used to craft a political explanation.

First crack: Cuba trades with the world

China, Spain, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Venezuela, and Russia, among other countries, maintain trade relations with the island. Cuba imports food, fuel, equipment, and other products. Therefore, there is no absolute commercial isolation. The pertinent question is why these relations have not managed to pull the country out of its prolonged economic crisis.

Second crack: there is also trade with the United States

According to the Office of the United States Trade Representative, exports of goods from the United States to Cuba reached $809.6 million in 2025. This figure includes merchandise from various categories and should not be confused with exclusively medical purchases. Furthermore, U.S. regulations allow for the export of medications and medical devices under certain conditions, although restrictions and challenges for specific operations still exist.

An uncomfortable question arises for Havana: if there are legal ways to obtain medical products, why do so many hospitals lack medications, instruments, functional equipment, and basic resources to care for patients?

Third crack: hospitals demand explanations

In May 2026, the independent Cuban press, citing public data on bilateral trade, reported that Cuba made purchases in the United States during 2025 of pharmaceutical supplies, surgical and orthopedic instruments, as well as donations of medical products valued at around five million dollars.

These data do not demonstrate that health needs are being met: purchases may be insufficient, and donations do not resolve a structural crisis. However, they raise legitimate questions. What quantities are being acquired? What institutions are they allocated to? How are they distributed? What resources are dedicated to the maintenance of hospitals? Where are the public reports that allow for tracking this process?

It is not enough to denounce U.S. restrictions. It is also necessary to explain the management of national resources, the lack of investments, the deterioration of facilities, and the decisions that have contributed to weakening the healthcare system.

Fourth crack: the embargo does not absolve the Government

U.S. sanctions create real obstacles and can increase operational costs, complicate payments, and limit business opportunities. Ignoring this would distort the analysis. However, turning the embargo into a universal explanation also prevents an examination of the accountability of those who have governed Cuba for decades.

The government controls a significant part of the economy, decides budget priorities, and manages public resources. Therefore, it must be accountable for its results, especially when the health and lives of citizens are at stake.

The conclusion is not to deny the embargo, but to reject the notion that it serves as an automatic answer to all questions. Cuba engages in trade, purchases American products, and has authorized channels to acquire medical supplies. While restrictions do exist, there are also internal responsibilities that need to be investigated.

If the Cuban state stopped scrutinizing everything, lifted controls, allowed farmers to produce, ceased to set prices, and permitted the necessary intermediary between producers and the market, there would be no hunger in Cuba. An inefficient and unproductive state needs to appropriate what belongs to others... This is the plain truth...

The final question is simple: who is accountable for the money spent, the mismanaged resources, and the hospitals that cannot adequately care for Cubans?

The historical truth does not accept single explanations nor grants impunity to any government. The Cuban people deserve to know both the cost of external sanctions and the consequences of the decisions made by those who lead their country.