Trump Reinstates Cuba on State Sponsor of Terrorism List
In a swift and controversial move, former U.S. President Donald Trump reinstated Cuba on the list of state sponsors of terrorism, overturning a decision by President Joe Biden to remove the island nation from the blacklist just days earlier. This dramatic reversal, announced by the White House hours after Trump’s inauguration, has drawn sharp criticism from Cuban leadership and sparked renewed debate about U.S.-Cuba relations.
The decision to re-designate Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism has far-reaching consequences, as it severely restricts foreign investment and imposes economic sanctions that further isolate the nation. Biden’s original decision to remove Cuba from the list had come as part of a negotiated agreement to release 553 prisoners, many of whom were arrested during mass protests in 2021. Following through on its promise, Cuba released the prisoners, including prominent opposition leader Daniel Ferrer. However, Trump’s abrupt policy reversal left Cuban officials and international observers questioning the future of U.S.-Cuba diplomacy.
Political Fallout and Cuban Reaction
Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel expressed outrage over Trump’s move, labeling it as an act of "arrogance and disregard for the truth." In a statement on social media, Díaz-Canel accused the U.S. administration of escalating an “economic war” aimed at undermining Cuba’s sovereignty. His comments reflect longstanding grievances over U.S. policies that have subjected Cuba to decades of sanctions.
The decision also sparked broader criticism of U.S. foreign policy, particularly the practice of using economic pressure as a tool for political leverage. Analysts suggest that this move could have significant ramifications for Cuba’s economy, which has already been battered by ongoing sanctions and the global economic downturn.
The Role of Secretary of State Marco Rubio
Trump’s reinstatement of Cuba on the terror list coincided with the confirmation of Marco Rubio as Secretary of State. A Cuban-American and vocal critic of the communist regime, Rubio strongly supported the designation. During his confirmation hearing, Rubio cited multiple reasons for Cuba’s inclusion on the list, including its alleged support for militant groups like the ELN in Colombia, the FARC, Hamas, and Hezbollah. He also highlighted Cuba’s history of hosting espionage operations on behalf of foreign governments, just 90 miles from U.S. shores.
Rubio’s hardline stance underscores a broader shift in U.S. policy toward Cuba, reversing the reconciliation efforts championed by former President Barack Obama. Under Obama, relations between the two countries had thawed, leading to the removal of Cuba from the terror list in 2015 and the reopening of embassies in Washington and Havana.
Historical Context and Broader Implications
The U.S. designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism has deep historical roots, dating back to the Cold War. The Trump administration’s decision in 2021 to initially re-add Cuba to the list cited its refusal to extradite ELN members to Colombia and its alleged support for terrorist organizations. Although Colombia’s new president, Gustavo Petro, has taken a more conciliatory approach toward the ELN, recent conflicts between the group and the Colombian government have reignited tensions, adding complexity to U.S. considerations.
Only three other countries—Iran, North Korea, and Syria—are currently designated as state sponsors of terrorism. The inclusion of Cuba on this list not only isolates the nation further but also signals a significant departure from Biden’s strategy of engagement and diplomacy. Critics argue that the move risks deepening Cuba’s economic struggles without offering tangible benefits to U.S. security.
Looking Ahead
The reinstatement of Cuba on the terror list highlights the deep ideological divide in U.S. foreign policy approaches. While proponents of the move argue it is necessary to hold Cuba accountable for its alleged actions, detractors warn that it could exacerbate humanitarian issues and hinder any future diplomatic progress. As the U.S. grapples with shifting geopolitical realities, the implications of this decision will likely reverberate for years to come.
This development underscores the fragile nature of U.S.-Cuba relations and raises questions about the role of sanctions in achieving foreign policy goals. Whether this approach will succeed in pressuring Cuba remains uncertain, but it undoubtedly cements Trump’s hardline legacy on the issue.
