Sanctions Imposed by the Trump Administration on Cuba
The Trump administration imposed an extensive suite of new sanctions on Cuba, largely reversing the Obama-era policies that sought to normalize relations between the United States and the island nation. The key measures included redesignating Cuba as a “state sponsor of terrorism” in January 2021, which led to a range of additional restrictions such as prohibitions on defense exports, restrictions on U.S. financial transactions with Cuban entities, limitations on travel, and bans on certain forms of commerce and remittances between the U.S. and Cuba. In parallel, Trump reinstated and expanded the “restricted list” system, which forbids U.S. individuals and firms from conducting direct financial transactions with numerous Cuban companies controlled by the military, most notably the conglomerate GAESA that manages substantial portions of the economy, especially the tourism sector.
Travel sanctions were heightened, eliminating most categories of individual travel, barring group educational exchanges, suspending cruise ship visits, and restricting U.S. flights to airports in Havana only, affecting the freedom of movement for both Cuban Americans and Cuban nationals. Furthermore, the administration set strict caps on the amount of remittances Cuban Americans could send to their families, cutting a vital source of hard currency for everyday Cubans, and barred the use of U.S. financial channels for many transactions.
Additionally, in 2019, the Trump administration became the first to fully implement Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, authorizing U.S. citizens to sue entities trafficking in property that was nationalized by the Cuban government after the 1959 revolution—an action that impacted both Cuban and foreign ownership and severely complicated international investment in Cuba. Entry bans and visa restrictions were also expanded for foreign executives and entities involved in business with the Cuban government or on expropriated properties.
The Official Reasons and Accusations Cited for Sanctions
The Trump administration justified these new sanctions primarily by alleging that Cuba supports international terrorism and undermines regional stability. Their stated reasons for listing Cuba as a terrorism sponsor included:
Allegedly harboring U.S. fugitives, including high-profile individuals sought for decades by U.S. authorities.
Refusal to extradite certain Colombian guerrilla commanders associated with the National Liberation Army (ELN), who were on Cuban soil during unsuccessful peace talks—and whom the Colombian government wanted in connection with a deadly car bombing in Bogotá.
Continued support for Nicolás Maduro in Venezuela, including claims regarding Cuban intelligence and military advisors assisting in the repression of Venezuelan dissent.
Suggesting, without presenting conclusive evidence, that Cuba may have been involved in or allowed mysterious “sonic attacks” (Havana Syndrome) on U.S. diplomats, although this theory was widely doubted by U.S. allies and remains scientifically contentious.
Alleged lack of cooperation with U.S. counterterrorism efforts and support for other authoritarian regimes in the region.
Analysis of the Evidence Supporting Sanctions
Despite these assertions, there has been a notable lack of independently verifiable, concrete evidence made public by the Trump administration to substantiate the claims of active Cuban sponsorship of international terrorism. For example, the supposed safe harboring of Colombian guerrillas was connected to their status as participants in internationally recognized peace negotiations, complicating accusations of terrorist protection. Allegations regarding Cuba's involvement in the “Havana Syndrome” incidents lacked broad scientific or forensic validation and were questioned by both allies and international experts. Even the claim of direct and operational Cuban support for Venezuela's Maduro regime, while politically plausible, was not presented with detailed intelligence that could withstand international scrutiny—and Cuba has repeatedly denied having 20,000 troops and intelligence agents in Venezuela.
Internationally, most U.S. allies and other global actors expressed skepticism regarding the terrorism designation, as reflected by the lack of broad alignment with the U.S. position. The Trump administration’s justification was rooted in political and strategic arguments rather than transparent presentation of prosecutorial-level evidence.
The Principle: Sanctions Should Only Be Imposed When Accusations Are Proven True
Fundamental legal and ethical standards require that sanctions—which can be understood as a form of penalty—should only be imposed based on substantiated and demonstrable wrongdoing. In U.S. federal prosecution, this standard is translated into the requirement that prosecution or punitive measures (including the imposition of sanctions) must be grounded in the belief that admissible evidence will be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction or to objectively prove the allegations upon which the sanctions are based. This ensures that actions taken by a government do not unjustly harm individuals or populations without just cause and helps avoid miscarriages of justice or political misuse of state power.
Applying this principle to international relations, especially sanctions with broad extraterritorial and humanitarian impacts, reinforces the obligation of governments to act transparently, proportionally, and with credible substantiation for any punitive measures—particularly when such measures can harm millions of civilians.
Historical Background: U.S. Sanctions on Cuba Before the Trump Administration
The Trump administration’s actions were the latest in a long line of U.S. sanctions on Cuba, rooted in Cold War geopolitics and the aftermath of the Cuban Revolution. The U.S. embargo began as limited restrictions in 1958, quickly escalated after the revolution with the nationalization of U.S. assets, and became a total trade embargo by 1962 under President Kennedy. Subsequent legislation, including the Cuban Democracy Act (1992) and the Helms–Burton Act (1996), intensified these measures by codifying the embargo and introducing extraterritorial penalties for non-U.S. companies engaging in business with Cuba. Under President Reagan, Cuba was first designated a state sponsor of terrorism in 1982 (removed by Obama in 2015, reimposed by Trump) in connection with its support for leftist movements abroad. Periodic relaxations—most notably during the Obama administration—were rolled back again by Trump.
Economic, Social, and Humanitarian Impact of the Sanctions on the Cuban People
The cumulative effect of more than sixty years of sanctions has been devastating for the Cuban population across all dimensions of economic, social, and humanitarian life. The United Nations has repeatedly condemned the embargo and estimated its total economic damage to the Cuban economy in the trillions of dollars. The sanctions have caused chronic shortages of food, medicine, energy, fuel, and other essential goods; obstructed the ability of Cuba to access the global financial system; inhibited humanitarian aid; and directly contributed to public health crises, including during the COVID-19 pandemic when Cuba could not obtain necessary equipment for vaccine production.
The Trump-era travel bans further isolated Cuban families, while remittance restrictions cut off a lifeline of hard currency estimated at billions of dollars annually, directly impacting household consumption, access to health care, and the means to purchase basic necessities. Human rights organizations, public health experts, and UN agencies have documented increased malnutrition, poverty, and despair among ordinary Cubans—especially the most vulnerable: children, the elderly, and those with chronic diseases.
The humanitarian harm is notably exacerbated by the complex web of licensing, financial prohibitions, and extraterritorial threats that chill even permitted humanitarian trade or donations, resulting in cancelled contracts, halted shipments, and extreme caution by international actors fearful of U.S. penalties. This “total pressure” strategy has also led to mass emigration, family separations, and forced shortages of vital supplies.
The Injustice of U.S. Sanctions on Cuba: A Crime Against Humanity
A growing international consensus among states, legal scholars, and advocacy organizations holds that the U.S. sanctions regime against Cuba constitutes a form of collective punishment and a violation of fundamental human rights and international law. The annual UN General Assembly resolutions overwhelmingly condemn the embargo and label it contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and to basic principles of state conduct. Numerous UN officials, including Special Rapporteurs, have explicitly argued that the use of broad economic sanctions to pursue regime change by inflicting economic deprivation and starvation is inconsistent with international law and may rise to the level of crimes against humanity.
The sanctions’ devastating impact—impeding access to food, medicine, and basic needs; causing avoidable suffering; and deliberately targeting an entire civilian population to achieve political ends—matches the definition of collective punishment as proscribed by international humanitarian law. Multiple commentators, including international legal experts and reputable NGOs, have publicly described the U.S. embargo and associated sanctions as crimes against humanity, pointing to the policy’s intent and actual effect of inflicting widespread pain to force political change, rather than as a proportional or justified response to proven wrongdoing. The embargo is often referred to in Cuba itself as "el bloqueo," connoting its totalizing, suffocating character.
Conclusion
The sanctions imposed by the Trump administration on Cuba were some of the most comprehensive and punishing in decades, justified by accusations that remain largely unsubstantiated by independently verifiable evidence. International norms, U.S. legal principles, and basic standards of justice demand that such harmful measures should only be enacted when accusations are objectively proven. The broader and historical sanctions regime has had catastrophic consequences for the Cuban people—depriving generations of basic needs, damaging health and development, and undermining human dignity and rights. These actions have been widely condemned as unjust, unlawful, and amounting to crimes against humanity in the eyes of the global community. To perpetuate such policies, absent clear proof and without regard for humanitarian principles, is an affront to justice and a grave violation of international human rights standards.
