Cuba has taken its escalating confrontation with the United States to the United Nations Security Council, accusing Washington of deepening hunger and humanitarian hardship through its decades-long economic embargo and fresh sanctions targeting Cuban companies and officials.
In a statement delivered to the Security Council on Tuesday, August 25, Havana warned against the use of hunger as a weapon of war, arguing that conflicts, economic inequality and unilateral coercive measures were worsening global food insecurity.
The Cuban government linked the country’s deteriorating food situation directly to the impact of US economic, commercial and financial restrictions, which Havana has consistently described as a blockade.
The diplomatic intervention came days after Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez launched a fresh attack on Washington over new sanctions imposed on Cuban state entities and officials, accusing the administration of US President Donald Trump of deliberately tightening economic pressure and undermining the government’s ability to provide essential services.
Rodríguez said the latest measures were affecting the movement of containers carrying food, medicines and medical equipment, including supplies procured by Cuba’s private micro, small and medium-sized enterprises.
The new US sanctions reportedly targeted nine Cuban state-owned entities operating in sectors including mining, metals, construction, trade, imports and related industrial activities. Senior officials of the Cuban Institute of Friendship with the Peoples, including its president, Fernando González Llort, were also sanctioned.
Rodríguez accused US Secretary of State Marco Rubio of pursuing policies designed to weaken Cuba’s economy and restrict Havana’s capacity to guarantee essential services for its population.
Cuba’s latest diplomatic offensive represents a broader effort to frame the long-running dispute with Washington as a humanitarian crisis, with Havana arguing that the consequences of economic pressure now extend beyond government finances to food supplies, healthcare, energy and everyday economic activity.
The dispute comes as Cuba grapples with a severe economic crisis marked by persistent shortages of fuel, electricity, food and medicines. The Associated Press reported last week that US sanctions were complicating Cuba’s efforts to attract private and foreign investment, even as the government pursues reforms aimed at expanding the role of private businesses.
Cuba has introduced measures providing greater space for private enterprise, imports and exports, foreign investment and private banking. Cuban officials, however, maintain that Washington’s continuing sanctions are undermining reforms that seek to open sections of the economy and stimulate investment.
The confrontation has also extended to energy supplies. A January 2026 US executive order sought to increase pressure on Cuba’s access to fuel, a move UN human rights experts subsequently described as having serious human rights implications and amounting to “energy starvation.”
For Havana, the combination of the decades-old embargo, intensified sanctions and restrictions affecting energy supplies has created a crisis with increasingly direct consequences for ordinary citizens.
Washington, however, maintains that its Cuba policy is aimed at pressuring the Cuban government rather than deliberately depriving the population. US officials have defended additional sanctions as necessary to close what they describe as loopholes through which the Cuban government generates revenue.
The dispute has created a sharp policy contradiction, with Washington urging Havana to reform its centrally controlled economy and expand opportunities for private enterprise, while Cuba argues that the same sanctions are making such reforms increasingly difficult to implement.
Cuban Ambassador to the United Nations Ernesto Soberón Guzmán recently questioned why Washington was imposing new sanctions as Havana opened more sectors to private participation and foreign investment. He warned that persistent shortages of fuel and electricity were discouraging investors and tourists.
Cuba’s latest appeal to the Security Council has now placed food insecurity at the centre of the decades-long confrontation, transforming what has traditionally been a dispute over sanctions and sovereignty into a broader international debate over the humanitarian consequences of economic pressure.
For Havana, the central question is no longer simply whether the United States should maintain its embargo, but whether economic measures that affect access to food, medicines, energy and other essential supplies can be justified when their consequences are increasingly felt by the wider population.
The latest escalation comes at a particularly difficult moment for the Caribbean nation, which is attempting to implement economic reforms while simultaneously confronting mounting shortages and intensified pressure from Washington.
Cuba’s appeal to the Security Council is therefore expected to sharpen the diplomatic battle over responsibility for the country’s worsening economic and humanitarian conditions, with the debate likely to focus on the relative impact of US sanctions, domestic economic policies and the combined effect of both.
