Cubans are dying under the oil blockade and punitive sanctions
Rep. Yvette D. Clarke states Cubans are dying under the oil blockade and punitive sanctions imposed since January, with infant mortality more than doubling since 2018. Hospitals lack antibiotics and medical equipment; vaccine losses occur due to electricity shortages; doctors manually ventilate children during blackouts across the island.
- Oil embargo imposed January 2026
- Infant mortality more than doubled since 2018
- Five eastern provinces specifically affected: Guantánamo, Santiago de Cuba, Granma, Holguín, Las Tunas
- Hospitals lack antibiotics, medical equipment; doctors manually ventilate children during blackouts
- Letter signed by Rep. Yvette D. Clarke, Congressional Black Caucus president, addressed to Trump and Secretary Rubio
The Congressional Black Caucus demands the Trump administration lift its oil embargo on Cuba, citing a humanitarian crisis with doubled infant mortality, food shortages, and medical service collapse since January 2026.
On May 22, Representative Yvette D. Clarke, president of the Congressional Black Caucus, sent a letter to President Donald Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio demanding an immediate end to the oil embargo imposed on Cuba since January 2026. The letter, made public through Cuban media outlets, framed the blockade not as a policy disagreement but as a humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in real time on the island.
Clarke's core claim was stark: Cubans are dying. She cited reporting from The New York Times showing that infant mortality in Cuba has more than doubled since 2018, a trajectory she directly attributed to the sanctions regime her administration continues to enforce. The numbers translate into concrete suffering. Pregnant women are arriving at clinics malnourished. Newborns are too fragile to leave hospitals and return home. Children who should survive are not surviving.
The letter detailed a health system in collapse. Hospitals operate without adequate antibiotics, without sufficient medical equipment, without the basic tools of modern medicine. Vaccine supplies spoil because there is not enough electricity to keep refrigeration units running. During blackouts—which have become routine—doctors resort to manually pumping air into the lungs of children attached to ventilators. This is not metaphorical deprivation. This is the actual practice of medicine stripped to its most primitive form.
Clarke and the caucus were particularly focused on five provinces in eastern Cuba: Guantánamo, Santiago de Cuba, Granma, Holguín, and Las Tunas. These regions, the letter noted, carry deep Afro-Cuban cultural and historical roots. They were already fragile before the embargo tightened. Hurricane Melissa had recently swept through, leaving recovery efforts still underway. The oil blockade arrived on top of that damage, compounding an already acute crisis.
The language Clarke chose was deliberate and unsparing. She called the policy "cruel," "barbaric," and "arcaic." She accused the administration of hypocrisy—of claiming to help the Cuban people while actively worsening their conditions. The caucus was not asking for a gradual easing of restrictions or a study of potential reforms. They demanded the immediate lifting of the oil embargo and the removal of all sanctions, arguing that basic survival resources must be accessible to the Cuban population.
The letter was framed as an urgent intervention, a moment when action could still prevent further loss of life. Clarke wrote that the caucus would not stand idle while this policy continued. The statement carried an implicit warning: this is a moral line, and the administration's response—or lack thereof—would be noted.
The Cuban government, through Vice Minister of Foreign Relations Josefina Vidal Ferreiro, publicized the letter on social media, amplifying its reach and treating it as validation of Cuba's own position on the embargo. For Havana, the letter represented rare institutional support from within the United States Congress for ending a policy that has shaped Cuban life for decades. Whether the Trump administration would respond to the caucus's demands remained an open question, but the letter had placed the humanitarian dimensions of the embargo directly in front of senior U.S. officials with no room for abstraction.
Citações Notáveis
Under the oil blockade and hardened sanctions, Cubans are dying.— Rep. Yvette D. Clarke, Congressional Black Caucus president
The Black Caucus will not stand idle while this administration continues a barbaric policy that generates unimaginable human suffering in Cuba.— Rep. Yvette D. Clarke
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why did the Black Caucus choose this moment to send this letter?
Because the oil embargo imposed in January had created a visible, measurable crisis—doubled infant mortality, hospitals without power. This wasn't theoretical. Children were dying. That threshold matters.
The letter mentions five specific provinces. Why those?
They're in the east, economically fragile, and deeply Afro-Cuban. The caucus was signaling that this crisis wasn't abstract—it was hitting communities with whom they have historical and cultural ties. Hurricane Melissa had already weakened them. The embargo was the second blow.
Clarke says doctors are manually ventilating children. Is that really happening?
According to the letter, yes. When electricity fails and you have no fuel to run generators, and you have children on ventilators, someone has to pump air by hand. It's not a metaphor. It's what medicine looks like when infrastructure collapses.
What does the caucus actually expect Trump to do?
Lift the embargo immediately and remove sanctions. They're not asking for negotiation or gradual easing. They're saying the policy itself is the problem and it needs to stop now.
Has this kind of pressure worked before?
The letter doesn't say. But by going public, by naming specific officials, by citing specific data, the caucus is creating a record. They're saying: we told you this was happening, and we told you to stop it.
Why does Cuba's government publicize this letter?
Because it's rare institutional support from inside the U.S. Congress. For Havana, it validates their argument that the embargo is unjust and that American officials themselves recognize the humanitarian cost.