特朗普的西半球霸权棋局：古巴会是下一个目标吗？

Mentioning the recent sharp turn in US foreign policy, we have to turn our attention to that isolated island in the Caribbean Sea—Cuba.

Less than three months have passed in 2026, yet the international geopolitical landscape has already experienced dizzying and violent upheavals.

In January, Venezuela's Maduro regime came to a dismal end under Washington's strong intervention; immediately following in February, the flames of war reignited in the Middle East, and the direct military conflict between the US and Iran stretched the nerves of global markets to the limit.

And now, the White House's strategic crosshairs seem to have shifted once again, this time locking precisely onto America's backyard.

President Trump spoke harshly at a recent press conference, claiming that the Cuban regime 'will soon fall'.

This seemingly casual remark was like dropping a depth charge into a calm sea, instantly triggering widespread speculation in the international community.

People cannot help but ask: after successively intervening in Venezuela and Iran, is Washington really preparing to make a move on Cuba?

If these seemingly independent geopolitical events are connected, a clear strategic thread emerges.

This is absolutely not some spontaneous political stunt, but a long-premeditated grand chess game aimed at thoroughly reshaping the power dynamics of the Western Hemisphere.

To understand the underlying logic of this series of actions, we must examine the role of the current US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio.

As a representative of Cuban-Americans, Rubio's hardline stance towards the Havana regime can be described as deeply rooted.

Rubio's rise to power has injected a strong personal flavor into this interventionism.

As a descendant of exiled Cubans, his personal family memory perfectly aligns with the US state apparatus, forming a highly aggressive policy orientation.

In his view, any compromise with Havana is a betrayal of the so-called 'free world'.

This heavily ideological policy-making logic has caused the US, when handling relations with Cuba, to completely abandon Kissinger-style realist balance and turn towards an almost fundamentalist confrontational model.

With him adding fuel to the fire, Washington's policy towards Cuba is undergoing a dangerous metamorphosis from 'maximum pressure' to 'substantive subversion'.

Opening the history of grievances between the US and Cuba, this short ninety-nautical-mile Florida Strait bears too many soul-stirring moments from the Cold War era.

From the painful lesson of the Bay of Pigs invasion to the imminent peril of the Cuban Missile Crisis, and the harsh economic blockade lasting over half a century, this largest island in the Caribbean has always been a thorn in Washington's side that is hard to remove.

The brief 'ice-melting period' during the Obama era once allowed the world to glimpse a ray of hope for reconciliation, but with the strong return of the conservative regime, this newly opened door of dialogue was not only heavily slammed shut, but completely welded closed.

Today, in post-Castro Cuba, although the regime has completed its generational transition, long-term economic sanctions coupled with global supply chain turbulence have plunged the island's living conditions into a slump.

Ever since the pandemic severely damaged Cuba's vital tourism industry, the country's economic engine has been in a semi-stalled state.

Compounded by the continuously escalating US sanctions, the depletion of foreign exchange reserves has made it difficult for the Cuban government to import sufficient food and fuel.

The sight of long lines on the streets to buy basic necessities has become a microcosm of daily life in this island nation.

This economic predicament, caused jointly by external blockade and internal rigidity, is precisely the perfect breakthrough point in Washington's eyes.

They firmly believe that when economic pain reaches a critical point, the underlying anger of society will naturally devour the current regime.

This internal vulnerability provides exactly the opportunity for external forces to intervene.

So, what actions does the US government actually plan to take in Cuba?

Frankly speaking, the White House itself might not have a tactical execution manual precise down to every single screw.

But their ultimate goal is abundantly clear: to completely end the current Havana regime.

This is not merely ideological fanaticism, but serves a grander geopolitical vision: establishing and thoroughly consolidating absolute US hegemony in the Western Hemisphere.

Looking back at history, the Monroe Doctrine has hovered like a specter over Latin America ever since its birth in the early 19th century.

From Theodore Roosevelt's 'Big Stick Policy' to various covert subversive actions during the Cold War, the US has never truly abandoned its paternalistic control over this continent.

Today's 'New Monroe Doctrine' has simply put on a more modernly packaged political cloak.

It no longer always relies on blatant Marine Corps landings, but more skillfully utilizes asymmetric weapons such as financial sanctions, information warfare, and long-arm jurisdiction.

Cuba, as the last bastion on this continent adhering to a heterogeneous ideology, has naturally become the ultimate testing ground for this set of modern hegemonic tools.

This strategic thinking, jokingly called the 'New Monroe Doctrine' by outsiders, has been repeatedly mentioned by Washington's core staff over the past year and has even been written in black and white into the US National Security Strategy report.

In their view, the Western Hemisphere must be an absolute US sphere of influence; any heterogeneous regime attempting to take root here, or the infiltration of influence by extra-regional powers, is a direct provocation to US national security.

Subverting a regime has never been as simple as inviting someone to dinner.

In Venezuela, the US employed a full combination of punches ranging from financial strangulation to propping up the opposition; in Iran, it was naked military deterrence and strikes.

Facing Cuba, what other chips remain in Washington's toolbox?

Completely cutting off remittances, further tightening the trade embargo, and even inciting social unrest in cyberspace—these conventional methods have already been repeatedly used.

If they want to achieve the expected result of 'falling soon', Washington will inevitably need to adopt more radical strategies.

Perhaps an escalation of the naval blockade, perhaps targeted sanctions and instigation of defection among high-ranking Cuban military officials, or even not ruling out the use of bases in neighboring countries for some form of paramilitary pressure.

Regardless of the specific means, this practice of using a country's fate as a chip in great power games will undoubtedly push the entire Caribbean region into an abyss of turmoil.

On the other hand, we cannot ignore Cuba's own political resilience.

Over half a century of blockade has not made this country yield; Cuban society has evolved a unique philosophy of survival amidst extreme scarcity.

However, today's situation is no longer comparable to the Cold War era.

The collapse of Venezuela's Maduro regime means that Cuba has lost its most important energy lifeline and political ally in the Latin American region.

This sense of isolation, like lips being gone and teeth feeling cold, is the most severe test Havana currently faces.

At the same time, the international community's reaction to this series of US unilateralist actions is also thought-provoking.

Although European allies align with the US in values, they are full of doubts about this brutal model of regime change.

Latin American countries are even more chilled by this naked interventionism; the dark cloud of 'who will be next' hangs over every leftist government.

Let us turn our gaze back to Washington's center of political power.

Florida, as a key swing state in US elections, has a massive population of Cuban-American voters within its borders, who have always been the target of politicians' vigorous wooing.

Therefore, a hardline stance towards Cuba is not only a need for diplomatic strategy, but also a consideration for domestic votes.

This deep binding of domestic politics and diplomacy has caused US policy towards Cuba to lose its elasticity, leaving almost no room for maneuver.

While the White House scatters its energy across multiple global fronts, the Secretary of State has effectively become the core operator of Western Hemisphere policy.

Stepping out of the confines of the American continent and looking from the macro perspective of global great power games, Washington's step-by-step pressing of Cuba also carries the implication of beating the grass to scare the snake.

In recent years, with the continuous deepening of economic cooperation by other emerging powers in the Latin American region, the US has felt an unprecedented strategic anxiety.

Viewing countries like Cuba and Venezuela as 'bridgeheads' for extra-regional powers to intervene in the Americas is a general consensus among US hawkish politicians.

Therefore, removing these 'thorns in the eye' is not only to clean up the backyard, but also to consolidate the fundamental base in the battle for global hegemony.

This is a typical zero-sum game mindset; it ignores the independent development will of sovereign nations and drags the entire world back into the shadow of the Cold War, characterized by bloc confrontation.

Beneath the grand geopolitical narrative, it is often the fates of ordinary people that are ruthlessly crushed by the wheels of history.

While Washington politicians pontificate about 'defending freedom' and 'regime change' in the East Room of the White House, the people on the streets of Havana have to struggle bitterly amidst soaring prices and continuous power outages.

The heavy weight of economic sanctions has always landed precisely on the shoulders of the most vulnerable civilians.

If, as the politicians say, the Cuban regime is about to collapse with a crash in the near future, then what follows—will it be the promised prosperity, or a long and desperate social tear and turmoil like in parts of the Middle East?

The lessons of history are vivid, yet humanity always seems to find it difficult to draw wisdom from them.

In this turbulent year of 2026, the game of power is accelerating in the most cruel manner, and this political hurricane in the Caribbean Sea has only just begun to accumulate its highly destructive energy.