Two countries that matter, working together, pushing back against an embargo they see as unjust
Two of the Western Hemisphere's most consequential democracies have once again aligned their voices against a policy that has outlasted a dozen American presidencies. In a videoconference between Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Claudia Sheinbaum, Brazil and Mexico reaffirmed their rejection of the US embargo against Cuba, citing a deepening humanitarian crisis on the island and invoking the enduring principles of multilateralism and non-interference. The exchange was not merely a protest — it was also a blueprint, as the two leaders advanced cooperation across energy, health, science, and trade, signaling that Latin America's two largest economies are quietly building an architecture of regional solidarity.
- Six decades of US economic pressure on Cuba have reached a new intensity under the Trump administration, and the humanitarian toll is no longer abstract — Brazil and Mexico are naming it publicly.
- Lula and Sheinbaum's joint statement carries diplomatic weight precisely because it comes from the region's two largest economies, amplifying dissent against Washington's Cuba policy on the world stage.
- Beyond the embargo, the two leaders are threading practical cooperation into their alliance — biofuels, Pemex-Petrobras energy ties, health, tourism, and scientific exchange are all moving forward.
- A forthcoming sixth meeting of the Mexico-Brazil Binational Commission will be the proving ground where stated intentions become implemented policy.
- Their shared endorsement of Michelle Bachelet for UN Secretary-General and Lula's invocation of multilateralism signal a coordinated effort to reshape the terms of global governance from the Global South.
On a recent Wednesday, the presidents of Brazil and Mexico connected by video to discuss the practical and the principled — and the headline that emerged was familiar but no less significant: both Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Claudia Sheinbaum said, again, that the US embargo against Cuba must end. Lula shared the exchange publicly afterward, making clear that both leaders view Cuba's humanitarian crisis as a matter of urgent international concern, even as the Trump administration has intensified its multidimensional pressure on the island.
The conversation ranged well beyond Cuba. The two presidents reviewed progress on cooperation agreements covering energy — including biofuels and a potential partnership between Pemex and Petrobras — as well as trade, health, tourism, public governance, and science and technology. These are the working foundations of a relationship between Latin America's two largest economies, and both leaders treated them as such.
Lula used the moment to articulate something larger: that multilateralism, international law, and the principle of non-interference are not abstractions but necessities in what he called a complex global context. The two leaders also backed former Chilean president Michelle Bachelet's candidacy for UN Secretary-General, and agreed to convene the sixth meeting of their Binational Commission to translate the day's discussions into concrete action.
In closing, Lula framed Brazil and Mexico as fundamental partners — engines of regional integration whose cooperation carries meaning beyond their borders. The call was, in that sense, both a protest and a construction project.
On Wednesday, the presidents of Brazil and Mexico picked up the phone—or rather, a video line—to talk about the things that matter to them: trade, energy, science, and a decades-old embargo that neither of them thinks should exist. Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Claudia Sheinbaum had a videoconference that touched on bilateral cooperation and international affairs, but the headline was clear: both leaders, again, said no to the economic siege Washington has maintained against Cuba for more than sixty years.
Lula shared the details afterward on social media, making sure the world knew that he and Sheinbaum had reaffirmed their position. They want the embargo lifted. They also want the world to understand that Cuba is in a grave humanitarian crisis, and they believe that matters. This wasn't a one-off statement—both leaders have been consistent in their support for Cuba, even as the Trump administration has tightened the pressure on the island through what officials describe as multidimensional pressure.
But the call wasn't only about Cuba. The two presidents reviewed the progress they've made on cooperation agreements struck in recent months. Energy cooperation came up specifically—biofuels, and a potential deal between Mexico's state oil company Pemex and Brazil's Petrobras. They talked about deepening their bilateral trade framework, and they noted advances in health, tourism, public governance, and in the scientific, technological, and innovation sectors. These are the practical bones of a relationship between Latin America's two largest economies.
Lula emphasized something else too: the importance of multilateralism, international law, democracy, and the principle of non-interference in global affairs. He said this matters especially now, in what he called a complex global context. It was a statement that carried weight beyond the bilateral relationship—a signal about how Brazil and Mexico see their role in a world that feels increasingly fractured.
The two leaders also agreed to have their foreign ministries organize the sixth meeting of the Mexico-Brazil Binational Commission in the near future. That meeting will be where the different initiatives they discussed get turned into concrete action. They also threw their support behind Michelle Bachelet, the former president of Chile, as a candidate for United Nations Secretary-General. And Lula wished Sheinbaum well with Mexico's role as co-host of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, alongside the United States and Canada.
In his closing remarks, Lula described Mexico and Brazil as fundamental partners in Latin America and the Caribbean. Their size, their economic weight, their populations, and their international standing make them engines of regional integration and shared prosperity. That's the frame: two countries that matter, working together, pushing back against an embargo they see as unjust, and building something larger than themselves.
Citas Notables
We reaffirm the importance and value we attribute to strengthening and preserving multilateralism, international law, democracy, and the principle of non-interference, particularly in the complex global context we face.— Lula, paraphrased from his statement on the videoconference
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does it matter that these two presidents said this about Cuba right now?
Because Brazil and Mexico are the two largest economies in Latin America, and when they speak together about the embargo, they're not just offering sympathy—they're offering political weight. The Trump administration is tightening pressure on Cuba, and having these two leaders publicly aligned against it signals that the region isn't going to accept it quietly.
But they talk about this all the time, don't they? What's new here?
The new part is the specificity of the humanitarian concern. Lula didn't just say the embargo is wrong in principle—he said Cuba is in a grave humanitarian situation because of it. That's a sharper claim. And the timing matters: this is happening while Trump is in office and actively escalating.
What about all the other stuff they discussed—the energy deals, the trade framework?
That's the real substance of the relationship. The Cuba statement is important symbolically, but the binational commission meeting they're planning is where the actual integration happens. They're building infrastructure for cooperation that will outlast any single administration.
Do you think this will change anything about the embargo?
Not directly. The embargo is a U.S. policy, and neither Brazil nor Mexico can force Washington to change it. But what they can do is keep saying it's wrong, keep building alternatives, and keep signaling that the region sees it as illegitimate. That shifts the diplomatic landscape over time.
What's the risk for them in taking this stance?
Minimal, honestly. Both countries have strong domestic support for opposing the embargo, and neither is dependent on the U.S. in a way that would force them to stay silent. The real risk is that the U.S. might retaliate in other areas—trade, investment—but both leaders seem willing to accept that cost.