The U.S. embargo on Cuba is morally wrong and strategically ineffective
Source: "Opinion | Trump Wants to ‘Take Cuba.’ These Cubans Have Thoughts. - The New York Times." May 28, 2026. www.nytimes.com
The Gist
The author argues that America's decades-long economic punishment of Cuba is both cruel and pointless. It's cruel because it hurts ordinary Cuban people who have done nothing wrong, and it's pointless because it hasn't worked to change Cuba's government in over 60 years.
Conclusion
The U.S. embargo and blockade of Cuba is both morally reprehensible (punishing an entire population) and strategically ineffective (failing to achieve regime change after 60+ years)
Premises
- The U.S. embargo has caused severe humanitarian suffering, including empty grocery stores, medicine shortages, and societal collapse due to fuel blockades
- The embargo's explicit goal since 1960 was to 'bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government' according to the Lester Mallory memo
- After over 60 years of embargo policies, the U.S. has failed to overthrow the Cuban government despite inflicting massive suffering
- Many Cubans distinguish between liking American people while opposing the American government's policies
- The current Trump administration is intensifying these failed policies rather than learning from their ineffectiveness
Assumptions
- Punishing entire populations to force regime change is morally wrong
- A policy that fails to achieve its goals after 60+ years should be considered ineffective
- The suffering of ordinary Cubans is primarily caused by U.S. sanctions rather than solely by their own government
- There is a meaningful distinction between targeting a government versus harming its people