Up Next: Cuba?

It's certainly looking that way.

photo of person, suit, black and white, people, military, soldier, army, monochrome, weapon, camouflage, war, shooting, gun, bullets, dangerous, troop, afghanistan, combat, cartridge, monochrome photography, machine gun, militia, camouflage battledress, projectiles, battledress, camouflage

from PxHere

POLITICO (“Pentagon puts building blocks in place for Cuba invasion“):

The Pentagon has spent months positioning the troops and weapons needed for the U.S. to launch a military attack on Cuba — all it needs is a final go-ahead from Donald Trump.

The president has floated an invasion of the island after economic and political pressure failed to topple the Communist government. But the Navy’s built-up presence in the region — the largest in the world outside the Middle East — would allow the U.S. to act immediately.

These strategically placed assets set the table for military action, from a capture of Havana’s leadership much like the seizure of former Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, to a series of precision strikes. And they open the possibility that the U.S. throws itself into the third international conflict of the Trump administration.

While we’re still mired in the second, no less. (Presumably, we’re counting the EPIC FURY and MIDNIGHT HAMMER as a single conflict with Iran despite the temporal break.)

Cuba is “in a lot of trouble,” Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Wednesday at a full Cabinet meeting. “Having a failed state 90 miles from our shores is a threat to the national security of the United States.”

That we’ve rather helped in making it a failed state as a deliberate policy notwithstanding, I suppose.

The armada in the region is slightly smaller than it was in January when the U.S. captured Maduro. But the USS Nimitz aircraft carrier strike group entered the Caribbean in May, along with several guided missile destroyers and cruisers that can launch precision missiles at targets onshore. An array of advanced American drones and surveillance aircraft have also circled Cuba for months, according to flight tracking sites. The USS Kearsarge amphibious ships and escorts, which carry 2,500 Marines, are off the coast of Virginia preparing for a new deployment, and could replace some ships heading home.

The surge provides a variety of military options, although the Pentagon would need additional troops for a massive ground invasion.

One hopes “massive ground invasion” is not the preferred course of action.

The Nimitz arrived in the region on the same day as the U.S. indicted former president Raul Castro, in what appeared a public show of force. “The Nimitz is likely there primarily for intimidation, though it could be used in a military operation if needed,” said Mark Cancian, a former Pentagon official and now a senior analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The ship, along with fighter planes based in Florida and Puerto Rico, would probably play a role in any military action in Cuba, he said. “Air strikes are possible to take out their air defenses to allow broader air operations or, perhaps, destroy their leadership with the idea of establishing a relationship as we have with Venezuela. Raul Castro would be their first target.”

I’m not sure why a 94-year-old former leader would be our first target. (He turns 95 next week.)

But the administration faces a timeline to act. Many of the biggest warships deployed in the summer are approaching 10 months at sea, far beyond the usual six to seven months. This has caused defense officials to worry about overextending crews, and adds to the stress on a naval force that is also conducting a blockade of Iranian ships in the Arabian Gulf.

The White House referred questions to the Pentagon. The Navy declined to comment on current deployments. Naval Forces Southern Command did not respond to a request for comment.

As a general practice, it’s not good policy to reveal plans for imminent military action to the press.

“These back-to-back long deployments will add up over time,” said a defense official, granted anonymity to speak candidly about military operations. “Keeping them out there so long creates more problems in the long run when it comes to refitting and repairing those ships once they come home.”

The prolonged missions come on the back of the record-setting 11 month deployment of the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, which ended this month after sailing from Europe to the Caribbean for the Maduro operation and then to the Middle East for the Iran war.

[…]

But the long deployments take a toll on the crews and Marines, who had planned for a normal rotation and are now months past their initial scheduled return home.

“You don’t sign up for an easy time, you know any deployment is going to be uncertain,” said Joe Plenzler, a retired Marine Corps officer. “But extending deployments like this, when it feels really open-ended, that starts to bleed into retention. How much more likely am I able to convince my family to do another enlistment and stick with it?”

Not to mention degrading the operational readiness of our forces in support of missions tangential to our ostensible national strategy of countering Chinese expansionism.

FILED UNDER: Latin America, Military Affairs, World Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is a Professor of Security Studies. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. Sleeping Dog says:

    Sure, why not. The king’s ego needs to be fed.

    The tragedy of Cuba is, if 40 years ago the US had lifted the sanctions and held a few carrots out, development would have created a middle class that would have demanded reform of the governing structure. It may not have been a US ideal, but the people of Cuba would be better off.

    ReplyReply
    1
  2. charontwo says:

    While we’re still mired in the second, no less.

    Trump’s behavior is that of a small child in some ways. If Iran drags on with no resolution he will get bored. He is already paying more attention to his ballroom, arch, reflecting pools etc., Cuba will be a welcome addition to his non-Iran interests.

    ReplyReply
    1
  3. charontwo says:

    @Sleeping Dog:

    Florida used to be a swing state, the Miami Cubans had to be pandered to, bunch of Marco Rubio’s.

    ReplyReply
  4. DK says:

    Another war? Off the Florida coast? Wild. This regime wants to waste billions on endless wars, a terrorist trust fund, and lawfare against a woman Trump raped — but the right swears we have no money for healthcare, clean energy, transit, or housing.

    Not normal. These Republicans are very weird. Running in 2026 and 2028 as the Wars Everywhere Party is…a choice.

    ReplyReply
  5. @Sleeping Dog: Indeed–US policy towards Cuba has been utterly foolish and counter-productive since the end of the Cold War at least.

    ReplyReply
    1
  6. Jen says:

    There is not a day that goes by that doesn’t have me thinking/dreading the enormity of the MESS this administration is creating, and how much time, work, and money it will take to clean it up.

    Sleeping Dog is exactly correct. A managed approach of lifted sanctions and gradual improvement in circumstances over time for the public would likely have elicited the desired outcome. But no, performative chest-beating on the part of Republicans trying to secure the Cuban vote has led us to…this.

    ReplyReply
    1
  7. @charontwo: If they go through with this, a lot of people in Florida who have been raised on fairy tales about Cuba magically reverting to pre-1959 are going have reality slap them in the face–especially if Trump pulls a Venezuela, kindnaps one guy, and then leave the place in the hands of the current regime.

    ReplyReply
  8. Joe says:

    @Steven L. Taylor: We spent most of a week in Havana last year with several presentations about how the Cuban economy functions and the answer is . . . it doesn’t or that it is totally dependent on the central government . . . that doesn’t function. There is a long road between the removal of the current regime and the development of a functional economic society.

    ReplyReply
  9. Kathy says:

    No Cuba until you finish your Iran!

    ReplyReply
    1
  10. Slugger says:

    Is the goal to turn Cuba into personal fiefdoms and Epstein islands for the Marco Rubios of Florida or just turn it into another Haiti? Perhaps making the world ready to accept the taking of a small island nation by a powerful neighbor? Look out Taiwan!

    ReplyReply
    1

Speak Your Mind

*