The pressure is rising. Today, the US Department of Justice unsealed an indictment of former Cuban President Raúl Castro, accusing him of murder for the Cuban military’s shootdown of two planes in 1996. The move against the ninety-four-year-old brother of the late Fidel Castro was accompanied by a Spanish-language message to the Cuban people from US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, attacking the regime and offering Cubans a “new relationship” with the Trump administration.
Echoing Rubio’s message at an Atlantic Council event today, Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH) noted that “Cubans have achieved incredible success all over the world, except for in Cuba, and that needs to change. And I think it can change.” Speaking to broader regional dynamics, Moreno pointed to the removal of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro in January and the upcoming Colombian elections: “Venezuela was enabling the Cuban regime to spread chaos throughout Latin America. If that ends, Venezuela’s well on a path, and we have a good result in Colombia, you have a renaissance for Latin America that is long overdue.”
The pressure campaign raises a number of urgent questions. We turned to experts in the Atlantic Council’s network for answers.
1. What’s the significance of the US indicting Castro, and what’s the substance of the charges?
Justice is finally being served for four Brothers to the Rescue volunteers—including three US citizens—whose planes were shot down at the direction of the Cuban Air Force headed at the time by Raúl Castro. Castro now faces life imprisonment or even death when he is brought to face trial for conspiracy to kill US nationals, destruction of an aircraft, and murder. This is a significant step: Criminal charges, of course, provided the impetus for US forces to enter Caracas in January and extract Nicolás Maduro to face justice in New York City.
—Jason Marczak is vice president and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.
The Trump administration is the first one daring to indict Raúl Castro for this crime that took place over thirty years ago. This action follows the decision by this administration to abandon the traditional strategic assumption that the US should not intervene directly to cause regime change in Cuba, and it’s consistent with the administration’s intent to guarantee the security and stability of the Western Hemisphere. This indictment is another step in the direction of precipitating regime change in Havana and returning democracy, freedom, and prosperity to the Cuban people.
—Sebastián Arcos is the interim director of the Cuban Research Institute at Florida International University, and an institutional partner of the Atlantic Council’s Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.
2. Why is the Trump administration taking this action now?
The Trump-Vance administration is acting now—on May 20 and in Miami—for a reason. May 20, the Cuban equivalent of the Fourth of July, marks the founding of the Cuban Republic back in 1902, so the date carries symbolic importance for this major US push. Both Rubio’s video message in Spanish to the Cuban people and the unsealing of the indictment of Raúl Castro in Miami are crucial pillars of a broader US strategy toward the hemisphere and the US posture toward anti-democratic, communist regimes. On the one hand, Rubio was speaking directly to the Cuban people. On the other hand, US Department of Justice officials are addressing the Cuban elites behind the island’s nearly seven-decade regime. The messages, in tandem, mark the beginning of the next phase of US policy toward Cuba.
—María Fernanda Bozmoski is the director of impact and operations and the Central America lead at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center.
3. What is the White House signaling about its endgame in Cuba?
The endgame in Cuba is clear, and it’s found in both Rubio’s Spanish-language address to the Cuban people and this indictment. It is to delegitimize the Castro regime and create the conditions for internal change in the medium term that would better align with the US interest. That US interest is a regime in Havana that is aligned with US security priorities and opposed to extra-hemispheric meddling by US rivals like China and Russia.
—Alexander B. Gray is a nonresident senior fellow with the GeoStrategy Initiative at the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security. He most recently served as deputy assistant to the president and chief of staff of the White House National Security Council during the first Trump administration.
4. What military and nonmilitary options does Trump have in Cuba?
Raúl Castro’s indictment requires the adoption of an aggressive, whole-of-government strategy that propels Cuba and, more importantly, the Cuban people, to a post-Castro reality. Special operations forces coupled with a US naval presence in the Caribbean are insufficient. While this level of military commitment will initially protect regional security at a tactical level, long-term strategic success requires focused economic sanctions and, later, investment.
Robust and synchronized law enforcement, intelligence sharing, and accountable leadership will unify the Cuban people and diaspora. A blend of hard and soft power will reinforce the hope of democracy while enabling a nation that has been crippled by dictators to thrive.
—Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Dustin Shultz is an incoming nonresident senior fellow at the Adrienne Arsht Latin America Center and the former director of intelligence at US Southern Command.
The US pressure campaign to restore Cuban democracy has now officially entered its next phase. The charges are a clear signal to the Cubans to play ball or else the United States will come after one of the original leaders of the revolution. Castro’s extraction would be a major blow to the decades-long invincible posture of the Cuban regime and would likely yield a surge of popular demand for change. Here, the United States must make it clear that gone are the days of looking the other way and that any crackdown on protesters would be met by a US response.
—Jason Marczak
5. How is the humanitarian situation in Cuba factoring into US decision making?
For years, members of the Cuban regime have sought to make minor changes to their decrepit system only to maintain themselves in power and to enrich those in the elite. The last few months—and just the last few weeks in particular—have brought a laser focus by the Trump administration to send the message that these days are over. From a new energy blockade to sanctions, the United States is demonstrating its commitment to a new Cuba, and matching sticks directed at the regime with carrots for the Cuban people including a standing offer of $100 million in food and medicine if it is distributed by a charity such as the Catholic Church and not by the government. As Rubio said in his video message today: “President Trump is offering a new relationship between the US and Cuba. But it must be directly with you, the Cuban people, not with GAESA,” the armed forces conglomerate.
Don’t expect US actions to ease up anytime soon, especially with the Trump administration’s Western Hemisphere focus. This is just the start of a new round of US pressure points to yield a free and democratic Cuba.
—Jason Marczak
6. How does this approach to Cuba fit into the wider Trump Doctrine, given the ongoing war in Iran and other priorities around the world?
Fundamental change in Cuba, ultimately leading to a closer alignment with US security interests, is the quintessential example of the Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, announced in the 2025 National Security Strategy. Going back to the nineteenth century, the US has viewed the denial of Cuba to extra-hemispheric powers as a core interest of the United States. Since the Castro regime assumed power in the 1950s and aligned with US adversaries, this threat has been particularly acute. The president’s focus on hemispheric defense, from the Panama Canal to Venezuela to Greenland, will be anchored by an eventual realignment of Cuba’s security posture in a direction favorable to the United States. Even while the US is pursuing Middle Eastern conflicts, the heart of the Trump (and longer-term America First) foreign policy agenda remains anchored in the Western Hemisphere.
—Alexander B. Gray