It’s been over 6 decades since the United States has imposed an embargo on Cuba, being probably one of the harshest and longest ever enforced. The different US administrations over the years have quite similar pathways against the communist island, although some US presidents tried to ease the sanctions and reconcile with Cuba. The reasons put forward in perpetuating the embargo remain always the same: it is a fight for democracy, to put economic and social pressure against the dictatorship of Castro, to guarantee human rights, such as freedom of speech. Nevertheless, the consistency of this policy seems to have armed more Cuban citizens that their government, also oppressed from frequent natural disasters, and considering than in over 60 years there has been no change into the political regime, it might be wise to reconsider a new diplomatic approach. The US sanctions to Cuba can be considered as a failed policy that led to nothing but the sufferance of Cubans and more.
During the Cold war, Fidel Castro overthrown the US-backed president of Cuba and established the first communist regime of the West, establishing therefore contact with the principal enemy of the US, the Soviet Union. President Eisenhower decided to close all diplomatic relation with the island and closed the US embassy for the first time in 1961, a political strategy continued by the following President Kennedy who, following the failed invasion of Bay of Pigs and the Cuban Missile Crisis, decided enforce a full embargo upon all trade between the United States and Cuba. Despite the blockade, Cuba managed to survive economically thanks to the aids from the Soviet Union, but when it collapsed in 1991, Cuban economy drastically declined. For decades, US presidents have continued this harsh strategy hoping for a political change and the surrender of Fidel Castro, but as it has never happened, President Obama decided to shift national plans and announced a restoration of diplomatic relations with Cuba, including the re-opening of US embassy in Cuba and easing travels and trade restrictions. When Trump took over, once again the embargo was fully implemented, cancelling all the efforts of the Obama administration, and putting Cuba into the list of “state sponsor of terrorism”, among countries such as Iran, Syria, and North Korea. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Cuba experienced the largest protest since 1959, where citizens complained about the lack of food and medicines: this led to the arrest of over 100 protesters, and the consequence was a large-scale migration of almost 79 thousand Cubans who reached the Nicaragua coast, with final destination the United States (Britannica, 2025).
Internationally, the US embargo has been condemned by the UN General Assembly for 32 years in a row, which usually see the vote against the blockade of 189 countries against 2, the United States and Israel (Lederer, 2024). Although these resolutions are not legally binding, they reflect global opinion of a need for a change towards Cuban policies, particularly considered that no shift has happened during the lasts 60 years. But the first obstacle comes over. The Helms-Burton Act of 1996 codified the embargo into national law, making it impossible for the President only to remove it, meaning only the Congress, if members are in favour, can lift it.
In line with international opinions, the Cuban sanctions can be defined as a failed policies for various reasons. First, in over 60 years there hasn’t been a change of government on the island, as the US hoped for, allowing Cuban leaders to shift the guilt of the island’s economic situation over the US administrations, increasing Cubans grievance toward the Superpower. Second, as it has happened during the pandemic of 2019, the embargo only caused harm to the civilians, leading to a lack of food, medicine, but also economic opportunities, increasing therefore poverty and food insecurity, instead of targeting the political leaders who have remained strong over the years. Third, it is an obstacle also for US businesses that lose trade opportunities with the country, unlike Europe, China, and Russia that invest in Cuba, making therefore economy grow. Forth, the blockade has created a serious migration crisis, with thousands of Cubans now living in the United States: this increases job competitions, unemployment, overcrowding of urban areas, and a decrease of minimum living conditions.
The aggressive policies against Cuba could also be defined as a symbol of hypocrisies: with a look at the North Korean embargo, for example, it can be seen how policies are more flexible in an authoritarian country, with serious human rights violations, and with nuclear power with which threatens every now and then of a nuclear attack. North Korea’s sanctions are mostly executive orders, meaning that the US president can modify them without the consent of the Congress, making the embargo less static and permanent. Also, despite the fact that North Korea is also in the list of “states sponsor of terrorism”, there are still some kind of diplomatic engagement between the two countries, and humanitarian aids, such as medical and food aids, are still allowed to be sent through UN agencies and NGOs.
In conclusion, the ineffectiveness and the negative consequences of the embargo are clear, as it seems more a sanction against civilians, rather than against the authoritarian government. By looking at the example of North Korea, it is also evident the double standard of the United States, which allows still some kind of relations and help towards a globally dangerous dictature, which harms more its citizens than the Cuban government, because of strategic and political reasons. A shift in policies is therefore necessary to support Cuban citizens: this would relieve the US from the burden of the migration crisis, would lead to economic growth on both sides, and would improve the humanitarian crisis in Cuba.
References:
- Britannica (2025) Should the United States Maintain Its Embargo Against Cuba?, available at: Cuba Embargo | Pros, Cons, Debate, Arguments, Communism, Cuba, United States, & Trade | Britannica
- Lederer E. (2024) UN General Assembly condemns the US economic embargo of Cuba for a 32nd year, available at: UN General Assembly condemns the US economic embargo of Cuba for a 32nd year | AP News
By The European Institute for International Relations
