Skip to main content

A trillion-dollar injustice: Why the US must end six decades long blockade of Cuba

By Bharat Dogra 
 
Despite decades of international condemnation and repeated United Nations resolutions, the United States continues to enforce one of the most enduring and punitive embargoes in modern history against Cuba. The measures have become so sweeping and entrenched that they are best described as a blockade rather than an embargo. This blockade has cost Cuba over a trillion dollars in lost trade and economic opportunities, while also hurting American businesses that could benefit from normal relations with the island nation.
The human cost has been even greater. Essential supplies such as food, medicine, and equipment have often been denied or delayed, creating hardships for ordinary Cubans. The country faced its most severe crisis after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when its trade network fell apart, and again during the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, despite these enormous challenges, Cuba’s health indicators remain on par with those of the United States, with similar rates of infant and child mortality and a life expectancy of around 78 years. The country also continues to rank in the “high human development” category on the UN Human Development Index.
For more than six decades, this blockade has persisted with only minor, temporary relaxations. Every year for over thirty years, the UN General Assembly has overwhelmingly voted in favor of resolutions condemning the blockade as a violation of the UN Charter and international law. More than 90 percent of member nations—including the European Union, Canada, and nearly all of America’s allies—support these resolutions. Israel remains the only major nation consistently siding with Washington.
Even within the United States, several political and business leaders have opposed the policy. Former Secretary of State George P. Shultz called it “insane,” while former Senator and presidential candidate George McGovern bluntly described it as “a stupid policy.” Both Presidents Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama attempted limited normalization of relations, but their modest achievements were swiftly reversed by their successors. The Trump administration went further, tightening restrictions and deepening the suffering of ordinary Cubans.
Prominent human rights organizations—including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights—have also called for an end to the blockade. Legal experts have described it as a violation of international law. In a study published in the Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Paul A. Shenyer and Virginia Barta concluded that the blockade “constituted an illegal act” and a “flagrant violation of the contemporary standard founded on economic principles and sovereign equality between states.”
The United States has justified its stance by citing events from the early 1960s, when Cuba nationalized U.S.-owned refineries and other assets without compensation. Yet the broader context reveals that Washington had already taken hostile steps—cutting off oil supplies and refusing to process Soviet crude that Cuba had imported to keep its economy running. When the U.S. abruptly ended sugar imports, Cuba was left with little choice but to nationalize and reorient its economy.
Today, the blockade’s extraterritorial reach extends far beyond U.S. borders, punishing foreign firms that engage with Cuba and discouraging investment in vital sectors like oil exploration. The result has been lost revenue, persistent shortages, and immense hardship for an island nation striving for self-reliance. Despite this, Cuba continues to display remarkable resilience. Its agroecological farming model has earned international praise, and its medical brigades have offered humanitarian aid in over forty countries during crises and disasters.
This enduring policy of isolation and punishment serves no constructive purpose. It has failed to bring political change, undermines the credibility of U.S. foreign policy, and inflicts needless suffering on the Cuban people. After six and a half decades, it is time for Washington to heed global opinion, uphold the principles of international law, and lift the blockade—permanently.
No more. The U.S. blockade of Cuba must go away, and never return.
---
The writer is Honorary Convener of the Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Man Over Machine (Mahatma Gandhi’s Ideas for Present Times), When the Two Streams Met (Freedom Movement of India), A Day in 2071, and Planet in Peril

Comments

TRENDING

The golden crop: How turmeric is transforming women's lives in tribal India

By Vikas Meshram*   When the lush green fields of turmeric sway in the tribal belt of southern Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, and Gujarat, it is not merely a spice crop — it is the golden glow of self-reliance. In villages where even basic spices once had to be bought from the market, the very soil today is yielding a prosperity that has transformed the lives of thousands of families. At the heart of this transformation is the initiative of Vaagdhara, which has linked turmeric with livelihoods, nutrition, and village self-governance — gram swaraj.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Was Netaji forced to alter face, die in obscurity in USSR in 1975? Was he so meek?

  By Rajiv Shah   This should sound almost hilarious. Not only did Subhas Chandra Bose not die in a plane crash in Taipei, nor was he the mysterious Gumnami Baba who reportedly passed away on 16 September 1985 in Ayodhya, but we are now told that he actually died in 1975—date unknown—“in oblivion” somewhere in the former Soviet Union. Which city? Moscow? No one seems to know.

Love letters in a lifelong war: Babusha Kohli’s resistance in verse

By Ravi Ranjan*  “War does not determine who is right—only who is left.” Bertrand Russell’s words echo hauntingly in our times, and few contemporary Hindi poets embody this truth as profoundly as Babusha Kohli. Emerging from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, Kohli has carved a unique space in literature by weaving together tenderness, protest, and philosophy across poetry, prose, and cinema. Her work is not merely artistic expression—it is resistance, refuge, and a call for peace.

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Rajiv Shah  Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Authoritarian destruction of the public sphere in Ecuador: Trumpism in action?

By Pilar Troya Fernández  The situation in Ecuador under Daniel Noboa's government is one of authoritarianism advancing on several fronts simultaneously to consolidate neoliberalism and total submission to the US international agenda. These are not isolated measures, but rather a coordinated strategy that combines job insecurity, the dismantling of the welfare state, unrestricted access to mining, the continuation of oil exploitation without environmental considerations, the centralization of power through the financial suffocation of local governments, and the systematic criminalization of all forms of opposition and popular organization.

Echoes of Vietnam and Chile: The devastating cost of the I-A Axis in Iran

​ By Ram Puniyani  ​The recent joint military actions by Israel and the United States against Iran have been devastating. Like all wars, this conflict is brutal to its core, leaving a trail of human suffering in its wake. The stated pretext for this aggression—the brutality of the Ayatollah Khamenei regime and its nuclear ambitions—clashes sharply with the reality of the diplomatic landscape. Iran had expressed a willingness to remain at the negotiating table, signaling a readiness to concede points emerging from dialogue. 

False claim? What Venezuela is witnessing is not surrender but a tactical retreat

By Manolo De Los Santos  The early morning hours of January 3, 2026, marked an inflection point in Venezuela and Latin America’s centuries-long struggle for self-determination and independence. Operation Absolute Resolve, ordered by the Trump administration, constituted the most brutal and direct military assault on a sovereign state in the region in recent memory. In a shocking operation that left hundreds dead, President Nicolás Maduro and First Lady Cilia Flores were illegally kidnapped from Venezuelan soil and transported to the United States, where they now face fabricated charges in a New York federal detention facility. In the two months since this act of war, a torrent of speculation has emerged from so-called experts and pundits across the political spectrum. This has followed three main lines: One . The operation’s success indicated treason at the highest levels of the Bolivarian Revolution. Two . Acting President Delcy Rodríguez and the remaining leadership have abandone...

The price of silence: Why Modi won’t follow Shastri, appeal for sacrifice

By Arundhati Dhuru, Sandeep Pandey*  ​In 1965, as India grappled with war and a crippling food crisis, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri faced a United States that used wheat shipments under the PL-480 agreement as a lever to dictate Indian foreign policy. Shastri’s response remains legendary: he appealed to the nation to skip one meal a day. Millions of middle-class households complied, choosing temporary hunger over the sacrifice of national dignity. Today, India faces a modern equivalent in the energy sector, yet the leadership’s response stands in stark contrast to that era of self-reliance.