Published: 11:53 PM, 12 September 2026
Holding Hostility to One Another Is Unwise for Both USA and Cuba
Donna Patricia
The long-standing hostility between the United States and Cuba has outlived much of the political environment in which it began. For more than six decades, mistrust, economic restrictions and diplomatic confrontation have shaped relations between the two neighbouring countries. Yet continued hostility serves neither side well. At a time when the world faces economic uncertainty, migration pressures, climate change and growing geopolitical tensions, Washington and Havana would benefit far more from dialogue and practical cooperation than from confrontation.
The roots of US-Cuba tensions go back to the Cuban Revolution of 1959, when Fidel Castro's government came to power and established close relations with the Soviet Union. The United States responded with economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation. The confrontation reached a dangerous point during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, when the world came close to nuclear war. Although the Cold War ended decades ago, many of the policies created during that period have remained.
The United States has long justified its pressure on Cuba by pointing to concerns about democracy, political freedoms, human rights and the treatment of political opponents. These concerns should not be dismissed. Every government has a responsibility to defend fundamental rights and encourage peaceful political participation. However, economic isolation has not produced the political transformation that Washington has sought. Instead, ordinary Cubans have often carried a significant share of the burden created by restrictions.
Cuba, meanwhile, has frequently portrayed US policy as an attempt to undermine its sovereignty and force political change from outside. Havana argues that decades of sanctions have contributed to economic difficulties and have restricted the country's ability to develop normally. While Cuba's domestic economic and political problems cannot all be attributed to US policy, the continuation of confrontation has undoubtedly made constructive engagement more difficult.
The geographical reality alone should encourage cooperation. The United States and Cuba are separated by only a narrow stretch of the Caribbean. Problems such as hurricanes, environmental degradation, maritime security, drug trafficking and irregular migration do not respect political boundaries. Cooperation between the two countries could therefore produce immediate practical benefits.
Migration is a particularly important area. Thousands of Cubans have sought to leave the island because of economic hardship and other difficulties. At the same time, the United States faces continuing challenges in managing migration at its southern border. Regular communication between Washington and Havana could help both countries address migration in a more orderly, safe and humane manner.
Economic relations also deserve reconsideration. Cuba has a relatively small economy, but there are areas in which greater commercial interaction could benefit both countries. Agriculture, tourism, medicine, telecommunications and environmental technology are potential fields for cooperation. American businesses could find opportunities in the Cuban market, while Cuban consumers could gain improved access to goods and services.
People-to-people relations offer another reason for a less confrontational approach. Cuban-Americans have strong cultural and family connections to the island. Many want both political freedom in Cuba and better relations between the two countries. Greater opportunities for families to communicate, travel and maintain relationships could help reduce mistrust.
None of this means that the United States should ignore Cuba's political shortcomings. Nor does it mean that Cuba should reject legitimate criticism of its policies. Dialogue does not require agreement. Diplomacy exists precisely because countries disagree. Governments can maintain principled positions on human rights while still cooperating where their interests overlap.
History shows that prolonged hostility rarely produces lasting solutions. Isolation can strengthen nationalist narratives on both sides and make compromise politically difficult. Engagement, by contrast, creates channels through which disagreements can be managed peacefully.
The United States and Cuba therefore need a new approach based on realism rather than resentment. Washington should examine whether broad economic restrictions are achieving their intended objectives, while Havana should take meaningful steps toward greater political openness, respect for civil liberties and economic reform. Progress on one side can encourage progress on the other.
The international community can also play a constructive role by encouraging dialogue rather than deepening divisions. Latin American and Caribbean countries, in particular, have a strong interest in peaceful and cooperative relations between the two neighbours.
Ultimately, neither the American people nor the Cuban people benefit from endless confrontation. The two countries have different political systems, historical experiences and national interests, but they also share geographical proximity and many practical concerns. They do not need to become close allies overnight. They simply need to recognize that permanent hostility is not a sensible long-term policy.
The time has come for Washington and Havana to replace suspicion with dialogue, punishment with engagement and confrontation with cooperation. A more constructive relationship would not solve all of Cuba's problems or all of America's concerns, but it could create the conditions for gradual progress. Holding hostility to one another is unwise for both the United States and Cuba; choosing peaceful engagement is the wiser path.
Donna Patricia reports for Florida
Tribune from Nicosia, Cyprus.
