By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Former President Donald Trump issued a stern warning to Cuba, asserting that the island nation would receive “NO MORE OIL OR MONEY” and urging them to negotiate a deal with the United States. This warning follows recent U.S. military action in Venezuela, including the capture of Nicolas Maduro, which has significantly impacted Cuba’s oil supply. Trump suggested that the Venezuelan oil, a critical resource for Cuba, would now be diverted. This has led to the potential collapse of the Cuban economy due to the financial implications.
Read the original article here
“Make a deal before it’s too late”: This is the chilling message from Donald Trump, echoing just days after a reported military action against Venezuela. It’s a phrase that instantly sets off alarm bells, given his history of transactional diplomacy and a complete disregard for established international norms. The core concern here is the potential for aggressive, self-serving actions disguised as negotiations, and the implications for Cuba, a nation already burdened by decades of US sanctions. The timing is particularly unsettling, as it suggests a pattern of bullying and coercion, using military or economic pressure to achieve favorable outcomes for himself, rather than any genuine interest in regional stability or the well-being of the Cuban people.
What kind of “deal” is even possible under these circumstances? The US maintains a trade embargo against Cuba, a restriction that has stifled the island nation’s economy for decades. Given this context, it appears that any deal Trump might envision would involve forcing Cuba into unfavorable concessions, likely at the expense of its sovereignty. The underlying principle is far from cooperation and collaboration.
The language used, that of a deal “before it’s too late,” evokes a sense of urgency and threat. It directly mirrors tactics he’s previously used, for instance, in dealings with Ukraine, where he sought to leverage military aid for political gain. This phrase suggests an ultimatum and a willingness to escalate pressure, potentially including further economic sanctions or even direct military action, to achieve his desired outcome. The fact that this language is being used after a reported raid in Venezuela only strengthens this assessment.
It is worth noting the consistent criticism that his approach mimics the playbooks of authoritarian regimes like those of Russia and China. This includes supporting regimes that align with his interests, regardless of their human rights record, and a penchant for making deals that benefit him personally. This could lead to a new world order where might makes right and the existing global structures that have promoted stability and cooperation for decades are dismantled.
This is a stark departure from traditional diplomacy, and it raises serious questions about the future of US foreign policy. Such actions seem designed to create instability, uncertainty and ultimately, fear. His actions appear to undermine the very principles of international law, and global cooperation. It’s as though he views diplomacy as an extension of his business dealings, where the strongest negotiator always wins, regardless of the ethical considerations or the long-term consequences.
The focus on “deals” is also telling. It suggests that he views political relationships as purely transactional, lacking any basis in shared values or strategic alliances. This approach fundamentally alters the dynamics of international relations, making it difficult for the US to maintain trust with its allies and to effectively address global challenges.
The implications for Cuba are particularly concerning, as they highlight the potential for the US to exploit its economic vulnerability. While the article notes that China has been working with Cuba, the overall power dynamics here are incredibly uneven. The threat of a forced deal with the US represents a threat to its national sovereignty and the stability of its government.
Furthermore, this raises the question of whether other nations are subject to the same pressures. If the US is willing to pressure Cuba in this manner, what other countries are at risk of being bullied into unfavorable agreements? This kind of conduct destabilizes the entire international order and could potentially have global consequences.
The underlying motivations for this behavior are far from transparent. Speculation ranges from a desire to extract resources or economic advantage to a complete lack of moral constraints. Regardless, this conduct can only result in long-term damage to the United States’ reputation on the world stage.
And of course, we can’t ignore the shadow cast by the Epstein files. The continued slow-walking of their release, and the removal of Trump’s name from them, fuels the perception that his actions are being driven by a desire to cover up any connections to these files. This further erodes public trust and makes it harder to assess his motives.
In conclusion, the message “Make a deal before it’s too late” sent to Cuba is a worrying sign of the current state of US foreign policy. It reflects a dangerous pattern of coercion, self-interest, and disregard for international norms. The focus on “deals” instead of collaboration and the threat of escalating pressure paint a picture of an administration willing to prioritize its own gain over regional stability. This approach jeopardizes the well-being of the Cuban people and undermines the principles of a fair and just international order.