5
#000000
#FFFFFF
War & Peace
Cuban Envoy Draws 'Red Lines' Amid Specter of US Invasion and DOJ Targeting Castro Like Maduro
Cuban Chargé d'Affaires Lianys Torres Rivera said her government is willing to negotiate with the US, but "the only exception is our sovereignty, independence, and right to self-determination."
May 15, 2026
Cuba's top diplomat in the United States on Friday underscored the inviolability of her country's sovereignty amid tenuous negotiations with the Trump administration and mounting fears that the US is planning to criminally indict a former Cuban president and possibly invade the island to abduct him.
Cuban Chargé d'Affaires Lianys Torres Rivera told The Hill that her country's socialist government is open to negotiating with the US, but that "the only exception is our sovereignty, independence, and right to self-determination," adding that "those are the red lines."
Torres Rivera acknowledged that ramped-up US pressure—including President Donald Trump's invasion threats and tightening of the internationally condemned 65-year economic embargo—is inflicting tremendous suffering on the Cuban people.
“It’s difficult. What the Cuban people are enduring these days is difficult," she said. "They are under a collective punishment from the US."
The Cuban government said Thursday that Trump's oil blockade has left the island and its 11 million people without fuel—a situation United Nations experts last week described as illegal "energy starvation."
“We have reorganized the whole country, the healthcare system, the education system, the transportation system, to keep the basic services running," Torres Rivera told The Hill. "But it doesn’t mean that they are running normally. They are running under huge stress.”
Still, "a serious country that respects yourself... won’t put on the table your political system or your internal order that the people of our country decide in a sovereign way," she stressed.
The delicate balancing act Cuba is being forced to perform was on stark display on Thursday as Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe traveled to Havana for talks aimed at pressuring Cuban officials into complying with demands that critics say would inrfinge upon the nation's sovereignty. These likely include political and economic reforms, releasing political prisoners, and ending or weakening Cuba's alliances with US adversaries including China, Iran, Russia, and Venezuela.
It was a bitter pill to swallow for Cubans, as the CIA was behind myriad efforts to topple their government, from assassination attempts against revolutionary leader Fidel Castro to the failed Bay of Pigs invasion to supporting Cuban exile terrorists who carried out deadly attacks that Havana says killed thousands of people.
Further stoking fears of aggression from the Trump administration,r unidentified US officials told CBS News that the Department of Justice is preparing to criminally indict 94-year-old former Cuban President Raúl Castro for the 1996 shoot-down of planes belonging to the subversive US-based group Brothers to the Rescue after they violated Cuban airspace.
Some observers noted the 1976 midair bombing by US-based anti-Castro militants of Cubana de Aviacion Flight 455, a commercial airliner carrying 73 passengers and crew. The CIA, under then-Director George H.W. Bush, knew that Cuban exiles were plotting to blow up a Cubana plane, but did not warn Havana. The perpetrators of the bombing eventually made their way back to Florida, where they were welcomed as heroes.
Others surmised that the reported planned indictment is a pretext for a US invasion and arrest of Castro similar to January's abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on dubious—and partially retracted—narco-terrorism allegations.Thirty-two Cubans, including military and police officers providing security for Maduro, were killed by US forces during the abduction operation.
"To me, this signals that the Pirate State could be planning another kidnapping operation against Cuba like they did in Venezuela," British journalist Richard Medhurst said in response to the reporting, referring to the US. "This is the lawless behavior they want to normalize around the world."
ACLU head of digital engagement Stefan Smith said on social media: "Remember Maduro and Venezuela? If you’re a foreign leader indicted in American courts, we claim the right to send the military to kidnap you. Indictment is permission to invade."
Following his visit to Cuba, Ratcliffe said that negotiations "will not stay open indefinitely," remarks that followed numerous threats by Trump to "take" Cuba.
"Whether I free it, take it—I think I can do anything I want," the president said in March as his fuel embargo caused blackouts that brought deadly suffering to the most vulnerable Cubans, including sick people and children.
Torres Rivera insisted that protests over the blackouts don't mean Cubans won't rally in defense of their homeland.
“When they are enduring 20 hours of blackouts, they have grievances, and they express it,” she told The Hill, cautioning US officials against a "wrong reading" of the demonstrations.
"We are preparing to defend ourselves," Torres Rivera said, adding that a US invasion "could be a big mistake. It could be a bloodbath."
"We don’t want Cubans dying in Cuba,” she stressed, nor “any American soldier.”
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump Says US Fighting Iran War ‘To Help Israel... Saudi Arabia... Qatar... UAE... Kuwait’—China Too
"Trump again says the quiet part out loud—America entered the Iran war to support a genocidal ethno-state and brutal absolute autocracies, all of whom are his political and commercial financiers."
May 15, 2026
During his campaign for reelection, one of President Donald Trump's central pitches was that the US needed to stay out of foreign wars in order to prioritize "America first."
But his decision to join Israel and launch a massive war with Iran, which has caused turmoil across the American economy, has left many voters rather skeptical of these motivations, believing the war benefits other nations—particularly Israel—more than the US.
That perception has not been assuaged by statements from officials like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who acknowledged in the early days of the war that a so-called "imminent threat" to the US only existed because Israel had planned to attack, or by the president's recent comment that he doesn't "think about Americans' financial situation" regarding the war.
In an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News on Thursday, Trump appeared to further affirm that the Iran invasion's impact on his own country is far from top-of-mind.
Trump was asked by Hannity about his weekslong effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran closed in response to the war's launch, causing a spike in global oil prices that has hit the US. Reopening the strait has become one of Trump's main demands as he pushes for a deal with Iran, even though it was open before the war began.
But Trump said on Thursday that other countries "need the strait more than we need it open." He cited his administration's aggressive expansion of oil drilling, which he has claimed would make the US more resilient to the oil shock, although it hasn't been enough to stop gas prices from soaring above $4.50/gallon on average.
"We don't need it at all," Trump said, to which Hannity responded incredulously, "We don't need it at all?"
"We don't need it at all," Trump reiterated. “I mean, you could make the case, you know, like why are we even, we’re doing it to help Israel, and to help Saudi Arabia, and to help Qatar and [the United Arab Emirates] and, you know, Kuwait and other countries, Bahrain—”
Hannity interjected: "It also helps China."
Speaking of his summit this week with Chinese leaders, including President Xi Jinping, Trump said: "Actually, I told him today, I said, 'You know, we're helping you, and we're helping you in another way,' because I don't think they want, I don't think China wants Iran to have a nuclear weapon either.'"
Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified in a written statement to Congress in March that Iran had not tried to rebuild its nuclear enrichment capability after earlier US and Israeli attacks last June, which undercut one of the administration's primary rationales for war.
Trump's former National Counterterrorism Center director, Joe Kent, said last week that the US intelligence community agreed in the days leading up to the war that "Iran wasn’t developing a nuclear weapon,” but said that these assessments were undermined by persuasion from "a foreign government—Israel," which "won the argument and forced us into this war."
Many of the US's Persian Gulf allies have publicly tried to distance themselves from the war, especially in the face of retaliation from Iran. But The Associated Press has reported that countries like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain have pushed Trump behind the scenes to continue escalating the war in an effort to weaken Iran militarily and force more permanent changes to the regime.
Some have noted the Trump family’s close personal ties to the Gulf regimes—from his family’s cryptocurrency venture which is buoyed by a $500 million investment from a powerful member of Abu Dhabi’s ruling family; to his son in law Jared Kushner’s private equity firm, which has received $2 billion from Saudi Arabia’s public investment fund; to his real estate empire which has lucrative Trump-branded properties popping up across the region.
Independent journalist Borzou Daragahi said that with his latest comments, "Trump again says the quiet part out loud—America entered the Iran war to support a genocidal ethno-state and brutal absolute autocracies, all of whom are his political and commercial financiers."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'Sinister and Ominous': CIA Posts Photos of Director in Havana as US Blockade Leaves Cuba Without Fuel
Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal called for an immediate end to the US blockade, warning that "we are contributing to immense suffering in Cuba and a worsening humanitarian crisis."
May 15, 2026
The director of the US Central Intelligence Agency met with Cuban officials in Havana on Thursday after the island nation's government said it had completely run out of fuel due to the Trump administration's oil blockade.
The CIA's X account posted photos of some of Director John Ratcliffe's meetings, blurring the faces of US intelligence officials who accompanied the agency chief. In a statement, the CIA said it met with Raúl Rodríguez Castro, the grandson of former Cuban President Raúl Castro; Interior Minister Lázaro Álvarez Casas; and the head of Cuba's intelligence services.
Havana, Cuba pic.twitter.com/7S7TtJPyf5
— CIA (@CIA) May 14, 2026
"This is one of the most sinister and ominous social media posts I've ever seen," legal scholar Maryam Jamshidi wrote in response to the CIA photos.
Ratcliffe, the highest-ranking Trump administration official to visit Cuba, decided to visit "to personally deliver President Donald Trump's message that the United States is prepared to seriously engage on economic and security issues, but only if Cuba makes fundamental changes," the CIA said.
A CIA official told NewsNation that "while the director emphasized that President Trump prefers dialogue, the Cubans should have no illusions that the President will not enforce red lines."
Trump has repeatedly threatened to seize Cuba by force, describing the island country as his next military target after Venezuela and Iran. Fears of an imminent military attack have grown in recent weeks amid Trump's belligerent rhetoric and surging US surveillance flights off Cuba's coast.
"I think I can do anything I want with [Cuba], if you want to know the truth," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office in March. "A very weakened nation."
"This failed policy needs to end immediately. Every day, we are contributing to immense suffering in Cuba and a worsening humanitarian crisis."
The spy chief's trip came a day after Cuba's energy minister announced that months after Trump imposed an oil blockade on the island, "we have absolutely no fuel oil, absolutely no diesel."
The same day, the US State Department dangled "$100 million in direct humanitarian assistance to the Cuban people." Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla said Cuba's leadership is "willing to hear the details of the offer and the manner in which it would be implemented."
"We hope it is free of political maneuvers and attempts to exploit the shortages and suffering of a people under siege," he added. "The best aid that the US government could provide to the noble Cuban people at this or any time is to de-escalate the measures of the energy, economic, commercial, and financial blockade, intensified as never before in recent months, which severely affects all sectors of the Cuban economy and society."
Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel echoed that sentiment, writing in a Thursday social media post that "the damage could be alleviated in a much easier and more expeditious way by lifting or easing the blockade, as it is well known that the humanitarian situation is coldly calculated and induced."
Progressive lawmakers in the US are imploring the Trump administration to end US economic warfare against Cuba, engage diplomatically with the country, and drop any plans for a military assault.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), who has come under attack from Republican lawmakers for visiting Cuba in April, said Thursday that "Cuba has run out of diesel and fuel oil and is enduring some of the worst blackouts in decades because of the US’ cruel oil blockade."
"This failed policy needs to end immediately," said Jayapal. "Every day, we are contributing to immense suffering in Cuba and a worsening humanitarian crisis."
Keep Reading
Show Less
'He's Just a Bad Person': Lone Democrat Jared Golden Joins GOP to Block Iran War Powers Resolution
"Those holding out in support of Trump’s war should be forced to answer how much pain will they ask their constituents to endure for a war that is wrong morally, strategically, and politically.”
May 15, 2026
Maine Democratic Congressman Jared Golden was the target of fresh ire late Thursday after casting his party's sole vote against a war powers resolution in the US House aimed at curbing President Donald Trump's disastrous war against Iran.
Though Golden, who is not seeking reelection this year, was an original cosponsor of the resolution (H.Con.Res.75) offered by fellow Democratic Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) back in March, he became the deciding vote in the 212-212 tie when it finally hit the floor—even as two Republicans broke with their party for the first time to support such a measure.
As The Washington Post notes, the resolution was "proposed early in the war by a faction of pro-Israel Democrats—Golden among them—as a compromise intended to win some Republican backing." While it did win three Republican votes in the end, it was Golden who helped sink it.
When first introduced in March, Gottheimer's resolution was seen as an effort by corporate-friendly Democrats to thwart a more aggressive version put forth by progressive members in the House just days after Trump launched the attack. The text of the resolution plainly "directs the President to remove the use of United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, including potential ground forces in a combat role or used for occupation, by not later than the date that is 30 days after [February 28, 2026], unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force against Iran."
Enactment would have put Trump's ongoing military operations against Iran in direct violation of the resolution.
"Jared Golden was the only Democrat to vote NO. If he voted yes, it would have passed," said Jonathan Cohn, political director of Progressive Mass, an advocacy group based in New England. "He isn't even running again. He's just a bad person who wants more people to die and wants a job lobbying for defense contractors."
While Golden had announced ahead of the vote he would be a "no" on the resolution, there was a time during the vote that four Republicans had entered "Yes" votes in favor. That number later changed back to three as it became increasingly clear how tight the vote would be.
"There weren't enough Democratic votes to kill it, that was why they held the vote open past the deadline until they were able to pressure one republican to flip from 'yes' to 'no,'" said Erik Sperling, executive director of Just Foreign Policy, who tracked the vote closely. "It's in the video."
Vulnerable GOP members of both chambers are starting to turn against Iran war
House joins Senate with narrowest defeat since war began (49-50, 212-212)
House WPR nearly passed but pro-war @HouseGOP pressured someone to change their vote last second to protect the war effort
⬇️ https://t.co/IW8AxPt8oM pic.twitter.com/87GGFAmr3i
— Erik Sperling (@ErikSperling) May 14, 2026
Golden defended his vote against the resolution by saying, "unfortunately its proposed 30-day deadline lacks any real meaning now that we are more than 70 days into this conflict," which is a stretch of logic—one critic called it "nonsensical rationale"—when the point of the War Powers Act is to put the president in violation—or alignment—of what Congress has authorized by law.
Ryan Costello, policy director for the National American Iranian Council (NIAC), noted that with Republican Reps. Tom Barrett of Michigan and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania voted with every Democrat except Golden to pass the resolution. GOP support for Trump's war of choice is beginning to crack under the pressure of soaring gasoline prices and the other economic pain the conflict has unleashed. Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—who has been a leading and consistent voice against the war—was the third Republican "yes" vote
“Two more swing Republicans in toss-up districts moved in line with the vast majority of Americans who want this war to end, just as President Trump is considering authorizing another phase of the war that would fail to solve the standoff with Iran and deepen the financial insecurity facing ordinary Americans,” said Costello. "The House of Representatives is now split down the middle, with more Representatives who have voted for Iran war powers resolutions since the war began than haven’t."
Earlier this week, three Republicans in the Senate joined with every member of the Democratic caucus except Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) on a war powers resolution that failed in a razor-thin 49-50 vote.
“Just a single vote flipping in the House and two votes in the Senate changes a narrow defeat on war powers into a victory,” added Costello. “There are lots of vulnerable lawmakers who could flip with gas prices continuing to soar and the President’s Iran strategy floundering. Those holding out in support of Trump’s war should be forced to answer how much pain will they ask their constituents to endure for a war that is wrong morally, strategically, and politically.”
In his statement on Wednesday, Golden said he would support what he described as a "clean" war powers resolution introduced by Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), which is set to come to a vote as soon as next week.
“I have said since the start of this conflict that the War Powers Act of 1973 grants the president only 60 days to conduct military operations without an explicit authorization from Congress,” Golden said. “President Trump, like all his predecessors, has refused to recognize the limitations of the War Powers Act, but to me the law is clear. His window for unilateral military engagement has closed. Hostilities, including the use of the US fleet to impose a blockade of Iranian ports, cannot legally continue unless the president seeks, and wins, Congressional approval.”
The expected vote, which will be the next in a series of efforts to check Trump's war, will put to the test the "rotating villain" theory, which proffers that the powers that be coordinate behind the scenes to make sure there is always a lawmaker willing to throw themselves on a political grenade to make sure certain legislation opposed by leadership in either party does not pass.
"In this case, Golden isn't really a 'rotating' villain," said Just Foreign Policy's Nathan Thompson, "because he's voted against every single Iran War Powers Resolution that's been brought to the floor so far.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular